arachne-digest Friday, February 4 2000 Volume 01 : Number 980 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2000 06:49:58 +0000 From: Steve - RH Linux User <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: OT: moving again I'll be back online before the month is out. In the meantime, don't discuss anything I don't want to miss out on! ;-) - Steve ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2000 09:07:12 -0500 From: "Samuel W. Heywood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [OT] DOS COPY command on an NT On Tue, 1 Feb 2000 21:15:53 -0500, Roger Turk wrote: > I was asked, >>> Mr. Turk, I believe you are the one that help me out last time regarding a > Dos question. I though maybe you can answer this one. > command: copy q:\home\sed\install.bat c:\winwin > Actual action => copies the file to c:\winnt > command: copy q:\home\sed\install.bat c:\winnt (computer does not have winnt) > Actual action => copies the file to c:\windows > What gives. do you know??<< > This is a new one on me! Does anyone know (or have an inkling) of what is > happening? > Thanks > Roger Turk > Tucson, Arizona USA This is certainly a new one on me too. Of course I know what would happen as a result of executing these DOS commands on a WIN 3.x or a WIN 95 machine. I have been told that DOS doesn't even work at with an NT machine. Did they tell me right or did they tell me wrong? Sam Heywood - -- This mail was written by user of Arachne, the Ultimate Internet Client ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2000 18:20:42 +0100 (MET) From: Bernie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [OT] DOS COPY command on an NT Sam Heywood wrote: >This is certainly a new one on me too. Of course I know what would happen >as a result of executing these DOS commands on a WIN 3.x or a WIN 95 machine. >I have been told that DOS doesn't even work at with an NT machine. Did they >tell me right or did they tell me wrong? There's a CLI for NT and it looks a lot like DOS, but it isn't real DOS. BTW: I forgot to test this (see original post) at university today, but I haven't heard of it before. (Please note that ex. the command "cd c&c" will change to the "c" directory and then execute a command/file named "c". (Example taken from "Command&Conquer" that a friend put on CD (together with a lot of other things) and I tried to reach this directory in NT4). //Bernie http://hem1.passagen.se/bernie/index.htm DOS programs, Star Wars ... ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2000 18:29:16 EST From: "Neil Parks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Correct address for list? On 3 Feb 00 at 5:20, arachne-digest wrote: > From: "Edenyard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > I seem to have seen quite a few different mail addresses now for > messages to this revered Arachne list. Is there an absolute authority on > the list who could say for certain what address to use? For example, is > it [EMAIL PROTECTED], or [EMAIL PROTECTED], or > [EMAIL PROTECTED], or.... What's the difference between all these > various addresses? [EMAIL PROTECTED] works for me > Does it vary, depending upon whether one subscribes to Arachne or > Arachne-Digest? Shouldn't do. - -- ...This msg brought to you by NEIL PARKS Beachwood, Ohio mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.en.com/users/neparks/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2000 1:21:6 +0800 From: J J Young <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: small java script prevents display The use of comment tags to hide scripting allows pre-JavaScript and Java-aware browsers to co-exist as long as the guidelines are obeyed. As Arachne is not a pre-JavaScript browser, she _should_ be aware of the script tags and choose to ignore the scripting between them, until such time as some Java capability has percolated. This would give her a "belt & braces" approach that isn't fazed by omitted comment tags. Incidentally, JavaScript doesn't only appear in the head of documents. Jake ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2000 21:45:52 -0500 From: "Glenn McCorkle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: small java script prevents display On Fri, 4 Feb 2000 1:21:6 +0800, J J Young wrote: > The use of comment tags to hide scripting allows pre-JavaScript and > Java-aware browsers to co-exist as long as the guidelines are obeyed. > As Arachne is not a pre-JavaScript browser, she _should_ be aware > of the script tags and choose to ignore the scripting between them, > until such time as some Java capability has percolated. > This would give her a "belt & braces" approach that isn't fazed by omitted > comment tags. > Incidentally, JavaScript doesn't only appear in the head of documents. That's a good point. Michael, Would this work??? "<script" == "<!--" and "</scritpt>" == "-->" Also IMO, "<!--" should not require "-->" The next "<" should be interpreted correctly even if "-->" is not found. - -- Glenn McCorkle [EMAIL PROTECTED] North Jackson, Ohio, USA DOS prog. for QV cameras http://www.angelfire.com/id/glenndoom/qvplay.html Other stuff http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ Arachne, The Web Browser for DOS Open the 'DOOR' to the WWW. Keep the 'windows' closed. http://arachne.browser.org/ http://arachne.cz/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2000 04:20:35 -0500 (EST) From: "Thomas Mueller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Duplicate messages A message that I sent once appears twice on this list, same Message-ID. I copied each one separately onto the References line, and they look the same. Second time, there were more header lines added by servers in .de & .cz domains. I believe this has happened before, in most cases not the sender's error. Support the International Alliance for Compatible Technology http://pages.cthome.net/iact/ ------------------------------ End of arachne-digest V1 #980 *****************************
