On 27 Apr 00, various people wrote Re: Windows Millenium Edition and Perl? Question
for AS
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Subject: Windows Millenium Edition and Perl? Question for AS
> From: Cameron Dorey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 08:01:26 -0500
> X-Message-Number: 10
>
> Yuck.
{snip}
No yuck. Good (see below).
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Subject: Re: Windows Millenium Edition and Perl? Question for AS
> From: Philip Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 15:09:57 +0200
> X-Message-Number: 11
>
> Cameron Dorey wrote:
> > I just ran across a website where the author was talking about being a
> > beta tester for "Window$ ME" and he said that M$ has "done away with
> > Real Mode DOS [which, he says, makes it more stable], ... On the
> > downside, however, you can no longer boot into DOS or shutdown to MS-DOS
> > as you could with previous versions of Windows: The only way to boot
> > into a command line with Windows Me is to use a boot disk."
>
> Hint: "booting to DOS" != "opening a DOS window".
>
> What he means is that, at boot time, you have no choice but to go
> straight to the GUI -- you can't press a function key to be left at the
> command line in real mode. Similar to how NT (and presumably 2000) works:
> on booting, you're always in the GUI.
It's exactly how NT works. There's perpetual confusion caused by the terminology "DOS
prompt" in NT. It *isn' t DOS*, period. It's a "fake DOS" which is far better than a
real DOS. It's an emulation, so to speak, of a DOS environment in which much code
that's been written (like old batch scripts) will run, it even provides an imitation
of the "DOS" command interpreter which is much of what makes "real DOS" so yuck:
command.com. But it's a trick; underneath command.com on NT is always cmd.exe, the NT
command interpreter and a far different critter.
BTW, there's a version of cmd.exe developed by M$ for Win2K on their Web site, for
free download. It will run on Win95. It helps a lot with some things (like Makefiles).
> However, you can still open a DOS prompt in NT, or in 95/98 after booting
> to the GUI, and I'm sure you still do so in WinMe. What you're running
> then is not real mode, but virtual-x86 mode (or something like that).
> However, it looks & feels very like real mode, and Perl certainly doesn't
> mind.
No, far from minding, Perl likes it much better. Nobody would want to use real-mode
DOS anymore. In almost no case would one not want a protected-mode process going on.
Unless one likes it when the OS crashes, just for fun?!
> Philip
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Subject: Re: Windows Millenium Edition and Perl? Question for AS
> From: Tobias Martinsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 09:17:41 -0700
> X-Message-Number: 13
>
> > Okay, if that is so, how are we to run Perl in WME? I really don't want
> > to have to add extra wait for <STDIN> lines or be really quick on the
> > <PrintScreen> key to capture output. I hope there is some way to keep
> > going the way we are without having to go to Win2K on my personal
> > desktop when the time comes.
>
> I've got WME, but no computer available to install it on and actually test
> it; in spite of that, I'm guessing that it'll be NTish where you use
> Virtual Mode, or whatever it is called, by running your scripts in an open
> command-prompt Window (a.k.a. DOS-box) during run-time.
It appears that whatever he read about this "Millenium Edition" Windoze it is just
about WinNT/2K in terms of how it works. We're just talking about M$ chucking the
backwards-compatibility dross garbage that's been making Win95 a headache since
forever.
> Tobias
> ----------------------
Best,
soren andersen
http://www.wonderstorm.com/techstuff/Perl_dex.html
---
You are currently subscribed to perl-win32-users as: [archive@jab.org]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For non-automated Mailing List support, send email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
