[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Bug #3542] DOS 'move' command is not treated as a command at all, w
|
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
|
Subject: |
Re: [Bug #3542] DOS 'move' command is not treated as a command at all, when using in rule |
|
Date: |
Tue, 13 May 2003 06:31:09 +0300 |
> Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 09:10:06 +0100
> From: "Shah Bijal" <address@hidden>
>
> HOWEVER... This appears to be a Windows 2000/NT4 issue - in Win 9x and DOS,
> move is an explicit standalone program.
Right, and that explains why "move" isn't there to begin with.
However, with the proliferation of the NT family descendants of
Windows (W2K, Windows XP, etc.), we probably should add "move" to the
list.
- FWD: [Bug #3542] DOS 'move' command is not treated as a command at all, when using in rule, Paul D. Smith, 2003/05/12
- RE: [Bug #3542] DOS 'move' command is not treated as a command at all, when using in rule, Shah Bijal, 2003/05/12
- Re: [Bug #3542] DOS 'move' command is not treated as a command at all, when using in rule,
Eli Zaretskii <=
- Re: [Bug #3542] DOS 'move' command is not treated as a command at all, when using in rule, Paul D. Smith, 2003/05/12
- Re: [Bug #3542] DOS 'move' command is not treated as a command at all, when using in rule, Earnie Boyd, 2003/05/13
- Re: [Bug #3542] DOS 'move' command is not treated as a command at all, when using in rule, Eli Zaretskii, 2003/05/13
- Re: [Bug #3542] DOS 'move' command is not treated as a commandatall, when using in rule, Greg Chicares, 2003/05/15