Just wanted everyone to know that, despite suspicions that a redirect
">NUL" might have caused the problems I had with getting FILES set
correctly, the redirect was not the problem.
The problem was totally typical for me. I've gotten so used to using
certain special files that I've forgotten they are special files and not
part of the Command.com structure. Such was my problem with getting
FILES up to the 59 I requested & couldn't seem to acquire.
Now that I've rewritten the line in autoexec to show full path [yeah, I
know I should practice what I preach] that I had honestly *forgotten*
was necessary, I get the number of files I need no matter where I put
the path statement.
Can you say "DURrrrrrrrrr, George!" ??
With moderately red face, I remain
l.d.
P.S. Trouble Shooting Tip of The Day: In any batch file, where things
would normally write to the screen, or where error messages can appear,
or where a >NUL statement resides, place redirects to a log file instead
to help in debugging. i.e. Wherever you have >NUL replace ">NUL" with
>>c:\batch.log and things like loading the mouse that usually would
write to the screen should also be redirected. Remember to use the
"append" double >> so that the file isn't overwritten by each new
response. Beats the heck outta removing @echo off and trying to hit
the pause button to see what is being 'said' by the system.
-- Arachne V1.60;b1, NON-COMMERCIAL copy, http://arachne.cz/
