Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@cygwin.com Message-ID: <3C81BFA9.2020606@ece.gatech.edu> Date: Sun, 03 Mar 2002 01:16:09 -0500 From: Charles Wilson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011019 Netscape6/6.2 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Robert Collins CC: Michael Schaap , cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: "start" for Cygwin References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Ah -- and that explains why one previously had to do "cmd /c start foo" from a bash shell. Okay, according to my tests (I put a 'start' shell script in my /usr/bin directory.) From bash, 'start foo' causes my script to run. From cmd, 'start foo' causes the builtin cmd command to run (even tho D:/cygwin/bin is in the front of my PATH). This is good -- I withdraw my objection (such as it was). Anybody else think this is a good cygutil? I think it *probably* is... --Chuck Robert Collins wrote: > Start is a cmd builtin - there is no start.exe > > Rob > > > > >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Charles Wilson [mailto:cwilson@ece.gatech.edu] >> > Anyway, I personally have no objection to including start in cygutils -- > > but the sudden appearance of a 'start.exe' command in /usr/bin (which > could hide WINNT/start.exe) may cause consternation in some quarters. > > FYI, I've just completed the following HOW-TO-CONTRIBUTE (to cygutils) > document. It will show up in /usr/doc/cygutils-X.Y.Z/ in the next > release of cygutils. > > --Chuck > > > -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/