Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 09:18:22 +0200 (IST)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender: eliz AT is
To: "Mark E." <snowball3 AT usa DOT net>
cc: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: bash 2.02.1 alpha port available
In-Reply-To: <199901200247.CAA92830@out4.ibm.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.990120091800.2569M-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com


On Tue, 19 Jan 1999, Mark E. wrote:

> 'ding.bat' won't run, but '/dir1/dir2/ding.bat' will.

Are you sure the directory where ding.bat resides is mentioned in the
PATH?  If so, I find it hard to believe that the above could happen.

A common mistake is to forget that Bash (and any other Unix shell)
don't consider the current directory to be implicitly prepended to
PATH, and fail to say `./ding.bat' instead of `ding.bat'.  Is this the
case, maybe?