Subject: Re: A question on cygcheck
From: Jeff <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2007 02:05:42 -0800
Newsgroups: lists.cygwin
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.com>

On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 19:35:53 -0800,
Brian Dessent <brian[at]dessent[dot]net> wrote:

>Dave Korn wrote:
>
>>   Same reason as strace, I would assume: it's a DOS-based program,
>>   not a cygwin one.
>
>I think you mean "it's a MSVCRT-based program" 

I guess that's one way to describe them. I've heard them described as
"native Win32 console-mode" programs-- I do not know if any of those
exist which are /not/ based on msvcrt so, perhaps these descriptions
are synonymous.

>since DOS hasn't existed in Windows in the last approx. 7 years.

I don't know about the 7 years part (are you saying they no longer
support ME?), but DOS /support/ still exists in XP by way of ntvdm.exe,
the "NT Virtual DOS Machine." I still use a few DOS (full screen
curses-like) utilities that have regretably not been ported to Win32.

I've heard that DOS support is completely discontinued in Vista,
though-- only one of many reasons not to "upgrade."

>(And now if I could only get people to stop incorrectly referring to a
>NT/2k/XP/Vista command prompt a DOS prompt... and I also want a pony.)

You don't think big enough. :) I want a percheron-thoroughbred cross
like my last good buddy of that lineage-- 2,000 lbs. worth of quiet
friendship...

-- 
"Sorry, my life is still in beta, and nowhere near stable enough for a
release."

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/