On May 27, 1:45 am, Markus Heidelberg <[email protected]>
wrote:
> I didn't mean the built-in interpreter of cmd.exe when I talked about
> shell, but sh.exe or bash.exe or something.
>
Sorry, my mistake. Somehow I missed the part where we were talking
about cygwin in this thread. I tend to assume that "shell" in the
Windows world means the built in one unless told otherwise.
> > Is this not a common occurrence? I have yet to see a non-
> > contrived case where the gvim.bat and vim.bat wrappers are not
> > sufficient.
>
> I thought I was clear enough with my non-contrived real world case from
> the previous mail.
Yes, I meant to say "from the shell". I saw that vimdiff.bat wasn't
working for your git diff/merge tool, but I was having problems with
vimdiff.bat anyway when I tested at home, so I couldn't speak to that
tool. At work, it seems to be installed just fine.
Regardless, I was under the impression that Tony was saying gvim.bat
and vim.bat wouldn't work in general. I understand now that he meant
in a Unix-style shell, which is certainly the case.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
