Wow, DOS!

[ScottyB]

Wow, I didn't know you can use unix commands in DOS. I will be using DOS a lot more now.

 

[Skyclad1uhm1]

C:\>ps
'ps' is not recognized as an internal or external command,
operable program or batch file.

C:\>cp
'cp' is not recognized as an internal or external command,
operable program or batch file.

C:\>df
'df' is not recognized as an internal or external command,
operable program or batch file.

C:\>du
'du' is not recognized as an internal or external command,
operable program or batch file.

C:\>killall windows
'killall' is not recognized as an internal or external command,
operable program or batch file.

 

[randomlinh]

? can't in any dos boxes for nt+. haven't used dos in ages... heh

 

[notfred]

<< Wow, I didn't know you can use unix commands in DOS. I will be using DOS a lot more now. >>



no you can't. What command are you refferring to?

ls doesn't work, rm doesn't work, mkdir doesn't work, filename completion doesn't work....

 

[bunker]

<<

<< Wow, I didn't know you can use unix commands in DOS. I will be using DOS a lot more now. >>



no you can't. What command are you refferring to?

ls doesn't work, rm doesn't work, mkdir doesn't work, filename completion doesn't work.... >>


Umm...that's always worked in DOS.

 

[Descartes]

<< ls doesn't work, rm doesn't work, mkdir doesn't work, filename completion doesn't work.... >>



Most of those could be created using a simple batch file. What form of filename completion are you referring to? I use the wildcard form all the time...

cd prog*\some*\fold*\etc

There are several unix utilities I actually ported myself (some in C, some in C#) because I use them all the time (grep, wc, tr, sort, uniq, etc.).

 

[ScottyB]

ls works, cd works, copy instead of cp, time works, DEL instead of rm. Can't find the one to make a new directory but I did it the other day.

 

[BigJohnKC]

I heard that filename completion almost works in XP's dos version. Not quite, though, since of there's more than one filename with the same letters in unix the tab hit twice will bring up a list of all filenames to choose from where XP just chooses the first one automatically.

 

[Skyclad1uhm1]

<<

<< ls doesn't work, rm doesn't work, mkdir doesn't work, filename completion doesn't work.... >>


Most of those could be created using a simple batch file. What form of filename completion are you referring to? I use the wildcard form all the time...

cd prog*\some*\fold*\etc >>


I presume he means using [Tab] to complete filenames and directory names. I use that all the time too, quite annoying when working in Windows.
Imagine you have a Program Files directory as well as a Program Fires, then P[Tab] would make Program Fi, and following with l[Tab] would give Program Files\.
Simple as that.

Just noted that you can do P*2, although you still need to know which other ones are there to address the right one that way.

 

[notfred]

<< copy instead of cp, time works, DEL instead of rm.... >>



Yes, and therefore, due to the "instead" they're not unix commands. And try doing del -rf. You can't. There's no unconditional switch for del.

Also, in unix you use "date" not "time".

 

[Descartes]

<< And try doing del -rf. You can't. There's no unconditional switch for del. >>



del /s /q

 

[Descartes]

<< Imagine you have a Program Files directory as well as a Program Fires, then P[Tab] would make Program Fi, and following with l[Tab] would give Program Files\. >>



True, that would be helpful. I might look at writing something to do just that, it wouldn't be all that difficult.

 

[notfred]

<<

<< And try doing del -rf. You can't. There's no unconditional switch for del. >>



del /s /q

>>



hmm, you're right

 

[Turkey22]

Well actually the thing is that these are all DOS commands and some of them you can use in Unix.
A lot of DOS commands are intuitive therefore it makes perfect sense if you were gonna make a command line you would use something intuitive. md for make directory cd for change directory dir for directory, etc. etc. I would think that most people use DOS before they use Unix. Actually now that I know Unix has some DOS commands I may use it more.

 

[ScottyB]

<< Well actually the thing is that these are all DOS commands and some of them you can use in Unix.
A lot of DOS commands are intuitive therefore it makes perfect sense if you were gonna make a command line you would use something intuitive. md for make directory cd for change directory dir for directory, etc. etc. I would think that most people use DOS before they use Unix. Actually now that I know Unix has some DOS commands I may use it more. >>

Unix came out way before DOS did buddy.

 

[Descartes]

<< << Well actually the thing is that these are all DOS commands and some of them you can use in Unix.
A lot of DOS commands are intuitive therefore it makes perfect sense if you were gonna make a command line you would use something intuitive. md for make directory cd for change directory dir for directory, etc. etc. I would think that most people use DOS before they use Unix. Actually now that I know Unix has some DOS commands I may use it more. >>

Unix came out way before DOS did buddy. >>



I don't think he was saying DOS preceded Unix, he was just saying people are often exposed to a DOS'esque environment before they are unix...

 

[hudster]

the only way you've got Unix commands working in DOS is if you've got something installed such as MKS Toolkit

-hudster

 

[Descartes]

<< the only way you've got Unix commands working in DOS is if you've got something installed such as MKS Toolkit >>



They're just programs, there's no magic going on there. <accent type="spanish">Tookit? We don't need no stinking toolkit!</accent> Many of the programs are actually quite easy to implement, and many people have done so.

 

[MrNutz]

wow...i would have thought most ATers would be fully functional in their DOS skills as well as UNIX....ah the days b4 windows 3.1 with only DOSshell to work with....those were the good 'ol days.....yes most UNIX commands do are cross-compatible with both OSs but they must be implemented correctly.....DEL c:\temp\temp*.* deletes this file and then RM c:\temp\ will remove the empty directory....damn I may have bust out the ol' DOS for Dummies....ha

 

[Descartes]

<< UNIX commands do are cross-compatible with both OSs but they must be implemented correctly >>



Huh?



<< DEL c:\temp\temp*.* deletes this file and then RM c:\temp\ >>



rm isn't correct for DOS-based platforms, it's rmdir. Also, no need to del, simply...

rmdir /s /q temp

 

[Skyclad1uhm1]

<<

<< UNIX commands do are cross-compatible with both OSs but they must be implemented correctly >>



Huh?



<< DEL c:\temp\temp*.* deletes this file and then RM c:\temp\ >>



rm isn't correct for DOS-based platforms, it's rmdir. Also, no need to del, simply...

rmdir /s /q temp >>



Think he is confusing it with 'rd'

the norton utility 'de' worked faster on large dirs btw, just change the first char into Alt-069