Re: Why do you use .cmd rather than .bat?

[Simon Pepping]

On Sat, Dec 03, 2011 at 06:02:29PM -0500, Jonathan Levinson wrote:
 Hi Glenn,
 
 I have a question for you about skynav FOP.  Why on Windows do you use .cmd 
 as the extension of the fop command file - fop.cmd, rather than fop.bat?
 
 We are going to be deploying skynav FOP at many sites and it would be great 
 if we could rename the .cmd file to a .bat file since it would require 
 fewer changes to our interface code.
 
 Doing some research it seems that on Windows 7, Vista, and XP there is little 
 difference between .cmd and .bat files, and differences only become 
 significant on Windows 98.  Am I wrong?  Did I misread an article on the Web?
 
 Thanks for the excellent work you have done!  Our Middle Eastern team tested 
 your code and found nothing wrong with it in the context of our reporting 
 tool, which calls FOP to do rendering.

Would renaming cause problems for users who depend on the name
fop.cmd? Should we maintain a copy named fop.bat?

Simon

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-users-unsubscr...@xmlgraphics.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: fop-users-h...@xmlgraphics.apache.org

RE: Why do you use .cmd rather than .bat?

[Jonathan Levinson]

A copy named fop.bat would be very useful to us.

We currently have most sites deployed on fop 1.0, which names the command 
script on Windows as fop.bat.  For Skynav fop, for our Middle Eastern sites, we 
are contemplating (after suitable QA) replacing fop 1.0 with Skynav fop.  
However, some of these sites will be on versions of our product which do assume 
the name of the script on Windows is fop.bat.  While, we can tell users to 
rename fop.cmd to fop.bat, it will simplify configuration if fop ships with a 
fop.bat.

We thank the FOP community for a superlative technology, which allows us and 
our customers to do report writing at many sites around the world in a 
cost-effective way.  Thank you to everyone who contributes to the FOP 
community!  It is truly a noble effort!

Best Regards,
Jonathan Levinson
Senior Software Developer
Object Group
InterSystems
+1 617-621-0600
jonathan.levin...@intersystems.com

 -Original Message-
 From: Simon Pepping [mailto:spepp...@leverkruid.eu]
 Sent: Sunday, December 04, 2011 4:07 AM
 To: fop-users@xmlgraphics.apache.org
 Subject: Re: Why do you use .cmd rather than .bat?
 
 On Sat, Dec 03, 2011 at 06:02:29PM -0500, Jonathan Levinson wrote:
  Hi Glenn,
 
  I have a question for you about skynav FOP.  Why on Windows do you use
 .cmd as the extension of the fop command file - fop.cmd, rather than 
 fop.bat?
 
  We are going to be deploying skynav FOP at many sites and it would be great 
  if
 we could rename the .cmd file to a .bat file since it would require fewer
 changes to our interface code.
 
  Doing some research it seems that on Windows 7, Vista, and XP there is 
  little
 difference between .cmd and .bat files, and differences only become
 significant on Windows 98.  Am I wrong?  Did I misread an article on the Web?
 
  Thanks for the excellent work you have done!  Our Middle Eastern team tested
 your code and found nothing wrong with it in the context of our reporting 
 tool,
 which calls FOP to do rendering.
 
 Would renaming cause problems for users who depend on the name fop.cmd?
 Should we maintain a copy named fop.bat?
 
 Simon
 
 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-users-unsubscr...@xmlgraphics.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: fop-users-h...@xmlgraphics.apache.org


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-users-unsubscr...@xmlgraphics.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: fop-users-h...@xmlgraphics.apache.org