Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 10:54:25 +0200 (IST) From: Eli Zaretskii X-Sender: eliz AT is To: Jeff Williams cc: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: ANNOUNCE: Bison 1.28 ported to DJGPP In-Reply-To: <200002281851.MAA23742@darwin.sfbr.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com Errors-To: dj-admin AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk On Mon, 28 Feb 2000, Jeff Williams wrote: > Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2000 12:51:01 -0600 (CST) > From: Jeff Williams > Reply-To: Jeff Williams > Cc: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com > Content-MD5: 3zEtFrY3F8koRqEjlNXoWA== > Content-Type: TEXT/plain; charset=us-ascii > Content-Length: 636 > > -: > -: Somebody suggested in the past a better solution: support for > -: > -: program-specific .env files. That is, the startup code of a program > -: > -: foo.exe would look for a file foo.env *after* reading djgpp.env. > -: > > -: > How is this different from having program specific `.rc' files? > -: > -: I don't know. Why is it important whether it is or isn't similar to .rc > -: files? > > Aren't .rc files a canonical means for modifying a program's environment > at startup? Not as far as I know. If you ask MS, they'll point to the Registry. > This thread got me thinking about how much of djgpp.env is (or must be) > djgpp-specific, and how much of djgpp.env could be taken over by > individual .rc files. The special characters inside %FOO% (like %>FOO% etc.) are DJGPP-specific, and are very important to make some subtle aspects automatically work.