Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Computer Support > alternative to DOS box

Reply
Thread Tools

alternative to DOS box

 
 
Just zis Guy, you know?
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-18-2009
On Mon, 18 May 2009 17:17:35 GMT, why?
<fgrirp*sgc@VAINY!Qznq.fpvragvfg.pbz> wrote:

>>Or, if you're sticking with M$, get to grips with PowerShell - at
>>least that is somewhere close to useful.


>Does powershell have that much better cmd line editing. Scripting yes,
>go for it no issues with that.


You can do a great deal with pipelining, session-persistent internal
variables and the like. I'm told you can use regex in almost the same
was as bash, but I am not using it in that way. I have used it for
tasks like enumerating the thousand-odd VMs on my infrastructure and
returning a list of those which match certain parameters, and a
colleague in the States uses it extensively for AD maintenance.

It was just a suggestion anyway, worth at least what the OP paid for
it

Guy
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
why?
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-18-2009

On Mon, 18 May 2009 20:07:11 +0100, Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:

>On Mon, 18 May 2009 17:17:35 GMT, why?
><fgrirp*sgc@VAINY!Qznq.fpvragvfg.pbz> wrote:
>
>>>Or, if you're sticking with M$, get to grips with PowerShell - at
>>>least that is somewhere close to useful.

>
>>Does powershell have that much better cmd line editing. Scripting yes,
>>go for it no issues with that.

>
>You can do a great deal with pipelining, session-persistent internal
>variables and the like. I'm told you can use regex in almost the same


Session persistent sounds handy, regex is usually done in bash or perl.

>was as bash, but I am not using it in that way. I have used it for
>tasks like enumerating the thousand-odd VMs on my infrastructure and


Sever things, like that it's really good for.

>returning a list of those which match certain parameters, and a
>colleague in the States uses it extensively for AD maintenance.


I heard about it beeing good for AD, a guy in the office does that.

>It was just a suggestion anyway, worth at least what the OP paid for
>it


Well worth mentioning, maybe I just haven't found any extra useful line
editor functions.

>Guy


Me
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
chuckcar
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-18-2009
why? <fgrirp*sgc@VAINY!Qznq.fpvragvfg.pbz> wrote in
news:(E-Mail Removed):

>
> On Sun, 17 May 2009 15:04:51 +0000 (UTC), chuckcar wrote:
>
>>"don" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in news:guo99s$8ib$(E-Mail Removed):
>>
>>> I find the windows DOS box to be rather limited in features and was
>>> wondering if there is something else would be better.
>>> I'm running MySQL as a service in WinXP and want something with more
>>> command line editing capabilities.
>>>

>>There's always bash - comes with linux and other *nices and due to wine

>
> You didn mention sh, zsh, korn.
>

sh is *any* shell. They all are less capable than bash and less used. The
reasons for them now is for very low memory environments - something
precluded by the mere fact that the OP uses MS.

> Linux isn't Unix, so it doesn't fall in with 'other'.
>

I never *said* it was unix. Nor did I say it was solaris (thank god). But
both are *nices.

> That will be *nix flavours.
>

Oh, so *that's* your unique name for them is it? Couldn't care less.

>>and dosemu was developed to work in the less capable MS operating
>>systems.

>
> Wine etc has nothing to do with OP and djgpp comes in where?
>
>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DJGPP
>>
>>As the above says, you can run dosbox and *then* use bash in it. This
>>may

>
> User has Win CMD prompt anyway, don't need DOSbox as an extra.
>

He uses dosbox. Bash works *with* dosbox and is a proper command shell.
Enough said. You could make a menu entry to run bash, but why bother? it's
only four letters along with one entry to the path statement that gives all
the other djgpp command line programs.


--
(setq (chuck nil) car(chuck) )
 
Reply With Quote
 
why?
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-19-2009

On Mon, 18 May 2009 23:05:34 +0000 (UTC), chuckcar wrote:

>why? <fgrirp*sgc@VAINY!Qznq.fpvragvfg.pbz> wrote in
>news:(E-Mail Removed) :
>
>>
>> On Sun, 17 May 2009 15:04:51 +0000 (UTC), chuckcar wrote:
>>
>>>"don" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in news:guo99s$8ib$(E-Mail Removed):
>>>
>>>> I find the windows DOS box to be rather limited in features and was
>>>> wondering if there is something else would be better.
>>>> I'm running MySQL as a service in WinXP and want something with more
>>>> command line editing capabilities.
>>>>
>>>There's always bash - comes with linux and other *nices and due to wine

>>
>> You didn mention sh, zsh, korn.


<snip>

>> Linux isn't Unix, so it doesn't fall in with 'other'.
>>

>I never *said* it was unix. Nor did I say it was solaris (thank god). But


No you said 'linux and other *nices' , which it isn't.

Hey I like Solaris, 2.5 series up to 7, haven't tried anything later.

>both are *nices.


I suppose this doesn't count then, when talking about GNU/Linux - “GNU's
Not Unix”

>> That will be *nix flavours.
>>

>Oh, so *that's* your unique name for them is it? Couldn't care less.


Wrong not mine, neither of which are mentioned in
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix

Sometimes a representation like "Un*x", "*NIX", or "*N?X" is used to
indicate all operating systems similar to Unix. This comes from the use
of the "*" and "?" characters as "wildcard" characters in many
utilities. This notation is also used to describe other Unix-like
systems, e.g. Linux, BSD, etc., that have not met the requirements for
UNIX branding from the Open Group.

Several plural forms of Unix are used to refer to multiple brands of
Unix and Unix-like systems. Most common is the conventional "Unixes",
but "Unices" (treating Unix as Latin noun of the third declension)


<snip>

Me
 
Reply With Quote
 
chuckcar
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-19-2009
why? <fgrirp*sgc@VAINY!Qznq.fpvragvfg.pbz> wrote in
news:(E-Mail Removed):

>
> On Mon, 18 May 2009 23:05:34 +0000 (UTC), chuckcar wrote:
>
>>why? <fgrirp*sgc@VAINY!Qznq.fpvragvfg.pbz> wrote in
>>news:(E-Mail Removed) m:
>>


> Sometimes a representation like "Un*x", "*NIX", or "*N?X" is used to
> indicate all operating systems similar to Unix. This comes from the use
> of the "*" and "?" characters as "wildcard" characters in many
> utilities. This notation is also used to describe other Unix-like
> systems, e.g. Linux, BSD, etc., that have not met the requirements for
> UNIX branding from the Open Group.
>
> Several plural forms of Unix are used to refer to multiple brands of
> Unix and Unix-like systems. Most common is the conventional "Unixes",
> but "Unices" (treating Unix as Latin noun of the third declension)
>

Riight. And you don't understand my above use in that context why?


--
(setq (chuck nil) car(chuck) )
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
div box questions; float text around a box, fit box to image size Gnarlodious HTML 4 05-05-2010 11:30 AM
IOS DoS defense causes DoS to itself:) Igor Mamuzić Cisco 2 05-19-2006 11:59 PM
[newbie]How to install python under DOS and is there any Wxpython can be installed under dos? john san Python 19 02-18-2005 12:05 PM
Unable to run MS-DOS in Windows and DOS properties tabs missing Don Computer Support 5 02-11-2004 07:20 PM
Executing DOS (yes, DOS) program from within Python? Ben Fairbank Python 2 10-07-2003 08:51 AM



Advertisments