alternative to DOS box

Discussion in 'Computer Support' started by don, May 17, 2009.

  1. don

    don Guest

    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.
    don, May 17, 2009
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. don

    Guest

    don wrote:
    > 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.


    I find dosbox useful for dos games and that is about it.

    There is the ultimate boot cd and I'm not much familiar with as much
    but seems OK is hirens boot cd, those seem to have extended dos
    utilities.

    Maybe visit the sites to see what dos programs they have to offer, and
    download individually, or download and burn the ISO(s) to CD and boot
    from them.
    , May 17, 2009
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. don

    why? Guest

    On Sun, 17 May 2009 02:07:29 -0500, don wrote:

    >I find the windows DOS box to be rather limited in features and was


    That will be Windows CMD prompt, as
    a) Win hasn't had DOS for years,
    b) DOSbox is this http://www.dosbox.com/

    >wondering if there is something else would be better.


    Better for what?

    >I'm running MySQL as a service in WinXP and want something with more command


    Did that for a while as well, once it's running as a service not a lot
    else is needed. Most of it went into small batch files to do common
    tasks. No don't ask it was 4 or 5 years ago.

    Ah the service bit isn't important it's the next bit.

    >line editing capabilities.


    You haven't said why it's not quite good enough.

    F1 and above all work for repeating last cmd / editing up to chars and
    doskey is still there.

    http://www.keyxl.com/aaa6547/218/DOS-Command-Shell-keyboard-shortcuts.htm

    There are all sorts of cmd shell adons, search for one that has the
    features you need.

    Me
    why?, May 17, 2009
    #3
  4. don

    chuckcar Guest

    "don" <> wrote in news:guo99s$8ib$:

    > 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
    and dosemu was developed to work in the less capable MS operating systems.
    The best and easiest way to get it is as part of djgpp - the deveopment
    environment for linux apps in MS operating systems.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DJGPP

    As the above says, you can run dosbox and *then* use bash in it. This may
    sound like an over complication, but due to the difference between how MS
    and *nix systems work - *nix systems don't require their windows to be
    running before their command shell, quite the opposite - it has to be done
    this way.

    http://www.delorie.com/djgpp/

    Is where it is actually available.

    Perhaps it's also time to graduate to linux.

    --
    (setq (chuck nil) car(chuck) )
    chuckcar, May 17, 2009
    #4
  5. don

    Guest

    chuckcar <> wrote:

    >
    >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DJGPP
    >
    >As the above says, you can run dosbox and *then* use bash in it. This may
    >sound like an over complication, but due to the difference between how MS
    >and *nix systems work - *nix systems don't require their windows to be
    >running before their command shell, quite the opposite - it has to be done
    >this way.




    (setq (chuck nil) car(chuck) )
    Chucktard, Chuckturd, Idiot, Clueless, Stupid and many more names this
    persons is called as time goes on. He makes no friends and alienates
    all he comes in contact with.

    He will give wrong information, stick to it to his last breath, then
    change his stance to the proper solution when it appears - taking
    credit for it as well.

    This person has no self pity and will steal others advice as his own.
    It's quite obvious when it happens.

    (setq (chuck nil) car(chuck) ) always has to appear right or correct
    and those long threads you see involving him is a "who can last the
    longest" or just the fact that he has to be right no matter how wrong
    he is. and I swear, last post appears important as well, an awful
    combination.

    This person will give advice that can cause you to lose your data,
    lose your computer (bad bios info) or just flat screw you.

    (setq (chuck nil) car(chuck) ) running Win98, a person who has never
    used a NT OS yet feels quite comfortable giving advice he has never
    used himself.

    This group likes the fact it's able to help others, (setq (chuck nil)
    car(chuck) ) really doesn't care about the user, just how he comes
    across (and that's always him being seen as right)

    But (setq (chuck nil) car(chuck) ) anytime you come up with some of
    your bogus advice, I will call you on it.

    Seriously if you receive advice from (setq (chuck nil) car(chuck) ),
    google the information first to see if it's even in the ball park.

    Pennywise.
    --

    Donald Rumsfeld Is Very Talented!
    http://img89.imageshack.us/img89/5360/rummy.gif
    , May 17, 2009
    #5
  6. don

    Guest

    "don" <> wrote:

    >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.


    Take a look at Cygwin, yes it has Bash as well as most other unix
    commands. It's pretty much the standard in it's field.
    http://www.cygwin.com/


    --

    Donald Rumsfeld Is Very Talented!
    http://img89.imageshack.us/img89/5360/rummy.gif
    , May 17, 2009
    #6
  7. On Sun, 17 May 2009 09:52:30 -0700, wrote:

    >>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.


    >Take a look at Cygwin, yes it has Bash as well as most other unix
    >commands. It's pretty much the standard in it's field.
    >http://www.cygwin.com/


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

    Guy
    --
    http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
    Just zis Guy, you know?, May 17, 2009
    #7
  8. don

    Guest

    "Just zis Guy, you know?" <> wrote:

    >On Sun, 17 May 2009 09:52:30 -0700, wrote:
    >
    >>>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.


    >>Take a look at Cygwin, yes it has Bash as well as most other unix
    >>commands. It's pretty much the standard in it's field.
    >>http://www.cygwin.com/


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


    That would work :) and with 500 pre made scripts, might be one the OP
    could use.


    --

    Donald Rumsfeld Is Very Talented!
    http://img89.imageshack.us/img89/5360/rummy.gif
    , May 17, 2009
    #8
  9. don

    why? Guest

    On Sun, 17 May 2009 15:04:51 +0000 (UTC), chuckcar wrote:

    >"don" <> wrote in news:guo99s$8ib$:
    >
    >> 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.

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

    That will be *nix flavours.

    >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.

    <snip>

    Me
    why?, May 18, 2009
    #9
  10. don

    why? Guest

    On Sun, 17 May 2009 18:03:26 +0100, Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:

    >On Sun, 17 May 2009 09:52:30 -0700, wrote:
    >
    >>>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.

    >
    >>Take a look at Cygwin, yes it has Bash as well as most other unix
    >>commands. It's pretty much the standard in it's field.
    >>http://www.cygwin.com/

    >
    >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.

    Sounds like OP really needs some sort of an interactive IDE to craft and
    execute commands. Athough not saying in the OP what's lacking doesn't
    help answer.

    >Guy


    Me
    why?, May 18, 2009
    #10
  11. 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
    Just zis Guy, you know?, May 18, 2009
    #11
  12. don

    why? Guest

    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
    why?, May 18, 2009
    #12
  13. don

    chuckcar Guest

    why? <fgrirp*sgc@VAINY!Qznq.fpvragvfg.pbz> wrote in
    news::

    >
    > On Sun, 17 May 2009 15:04:51 +0000 (UTC), chuckcar wrote:
    >
    >>"don" <> wrote in news:guo99s$8ib$:
    >>
    >>> 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) )
    chuckcar, May 19, 2009
    #13
  14. don

    why? Guest

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

    >why? <fgrirp*sgc@VAINY!Qznq.fpvragvfg.pbz> wrote in
    >news::
    >
    >>
    >> On Sun, 17 May 2009 15:04:51 +0000 (UTC), chuckcar wrote:
    >>
    >>>"don" <> wrote in news:guo99s$8ib$:
    >>>
    >>>> 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
    why?, May 19, 2009
    #14
  15. don

    chuckcar Guest

    why? <fgrirp*sgc@VAINY!Qznq.fpvragvfg.pbz> wrote in
    news::

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


    > 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) )
    chuckcar, May 19, 2009
    #15
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Don
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    2,037
    °Mike°
    Feb 11, 2004
  2. Wil Jansen
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    1,239
    Sparky Polastri
    Aug 17, 2004
  3. Wil Jansen
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    410
    Wil Jansen
    Aug 25, 2004
  4. Igor Mamuziæ

    IOS DoS defense causes DoS to itself:)

    Igor Mamuziæ, May 12, 2006, in forum: Cisco
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    529
    Igor Mamuzic
    May 20, 2006
  5. John Capleton
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    1,949
Loading...

Share This Page