X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id
         :subject:from:to:content-type;
        bh=He9lizees8FvkbYqwqJi55KEbZtyxQFUnq77McNYb5I=;
        b=rKxYQ2KQO/MD3ZNVtIFT88M2h6CQdZ0Ex7/UTL/7VD/PZ438cnAp85h8Ph1MUFnGVm
         sPsaslnnpwr3EQ4rH3rR9I7epQAX53n4REixDs8UaIJjT25I/nm9TfEYIW/1aeQG7exe
         1/EuRGZ/V6zF39f/niVfUHfeWa+nYi5Q+JS3X60aO20ltOQfSNwevgfL24IjUuEq/l7r
         JAhhqTUa8PCG4Wtvo73HB1vkegstDBapaLDBKyy14sIsQVRIcGWk8SN4t3UDgCQKFTUr
         ysCjr1MKM/RDf6ED5GtGf3vBGXBdHRg8AajrJSCO25NhTMQyQ3sxYPkyt6BhT18oHR5u
         wSCw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.50.190.234 with SMTP id gt10mr3673174igc.73.1358555511515;
 Fri, 18 Jan 2013 16:31:51 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <kdc2jk$nd4$1@ger.gmane.org>
References: <8738y3iigd DOT fsf AT dome DOT home>
	<kd22k1$vna$1 AT ger DOT gmane DOT org>
	<kd4557$3gn$1 AT ger DOT gmane DOT org>
	<201301151848 DOT r0FIm62T000949 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com>
	<20130115191524 DOT 11400 DOT qmail AT stuge DOT se>
	<201301151927 DOT r0FJRdxV003764 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com>
	<87mwwaqjs7 DOT fsf AT dome DOT home>
	<87y5fs10o6 DOT fsf AT harrington DOT peter-b DOT co DOT uk>
	<201301180857 DOT r0I8vjTw025696 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com>
	<kdc2jk$nd4$1 AT ger DOT gmane DOT org>
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 19:31:51 -0500
Message-ID: <CAPYb0EGW1MfeNiE39-Y02UrJTVwVWXjvPiU=geRqKaBe7yU5Wg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [geda-user] Any new geda port for Windows?
From: Bob Paddock <bob DOT paddock AT gmail DOT com>
To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

> They showed signs of the inglorious  "/" vs "\"
> misapprehensions.

Replace all of the "\" and "\\" with a single "/" and it should work,
from looking at your bug report.

It is only the Windows command processor that has the "\" vs "/"
issues, as forward slashes were used to introduce options on the
command line.

In places like header include files #include "dog/cat.h", and I expect
Schem files, forward slashes work just fine as there is no ambiguity
about them introducing command line options.

Now if there really is a hard coded "d:" that is a different issue.