> >Because BAT is a MSDOS reserved word, along with COM, LPR, CON, etc > > > >Those reserved words have been grandfathered into Windows systems. > > > Thanks for the explanation. :) At least the argument makes sense now, > although I don't believe the > reserved word status would prevent something like BAT.EXE from > peacefully living on a modern > Windows box.
You're right, and it is a bit silly arguing about it when it is so easy to test, assuming you have access to a windows machine: " C: CD \Windows\System32 COPY notepad.exe bat.exe bat DEL bat.exe " Tada! Works fine (obviously not an exhaustive test!) Of course there may be a Microsoft "Best Practices" document which states "thou shalt not name an executable 'bat.exe', nor shalt thou name them 'com.exe', or 'lpr.exe'". In any case, even if it were called 'bat', there is no reason that the actual executable has to have that exact name anyway. We have bacula-sd.exe, bacula-fd.exe, bacula-dir.exe. So the application could be called 'BAT', but the executable could (and maybe should?) be called 'bacula-gui.exe' or 'bacula-admin-tool.exe'. James ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
