From: Richard Dawe Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp Subject: Re: NT and DJGPP Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 17:31:19 +0000 Organization: Customer of Planet Online Lines: 29 Message-ID: <385BC4E7.C55D9E9@tudor21.net> References: <199912171554 DOT RAA02040 AT bspu DOT unibel DOT by> <385A7A20 DOT EDF22A95 AT home DOT com> NNTP-Posting-Host: modem-117.radon.dialup.pol.co.uk Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk 945630450 17961 62.136.42.245 (19 Dec 1999 19:07:30 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: 19 Dec 1999 19:07:30 GMT X-Complaints-To: abuse AT theplanet DOT net X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.51 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.2.10 i586) X-Accept-Language: de,fr X-NNTP-Posting-Host: iolanthe.tudor21.net To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Hello. "Edward F. Sowell" wrote: > For all its virtues, not the least of which is its cost, the > DJGPP port to DOS/Windows has some UNIX baggage. I am always reluctant > to complain too loudly, as I do use it occasionally and the folks here > provide a lot of helpful (and free) advice. I always thought DJGPP was designed to be as Unix-y as possible. To be quite honest, I've found the Unix way to be much better than Windows in many respects. bash is much, much better than anything I've used on Windows. COMMAND.COM is braindead, even on Windows NT. I think that the forward slash vs. backward slash issue is less of an issue these days, because people probably see more forward slashes than back on the web. > But the community is better served if these issues are better known, and > when raised by newcomers are addressed without being defensive. Well, the FAQ's always been helpful for me. Newcomers should read a lot of that, although I appreciate it can be hard work. I guess I'm being defensive too ;) Bye, -- Richard Dawe richdawe AT bigfoot DOT com ICQ 47595498 http://www.bigfoot.com/~richdawe/