I suspect the backslash thing actually ties back to DOS 1.0 and even CP/M, which had user-interface roots in the old DEC operating systems.
Those OS's used forward slash as the "option" indicator on command line utilities. In their earliest form, neither had hierarchical directories, so there was no conflict. When UNIX-style paths appeared in DOS 2.0, to avoid breaking compatibility with existing BAT files (and confusing users), IBM (or whoever) used the backslash for the path separator. > -----Original Message----- > From: Dragan Krnic [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 11:05 AM > To: Michael MacIsaac > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [Samba] Re: Full wNT/w2K ACL conformance > > > >> consider the backslash. Was there any need for it, > >> given that Unix slash was in existence for decades > >> when DOS came around? No, just like much of so > >> called ACLs, it is a way to lock the installed base > >> away from recognized standards to proprietary > >> captivity. > > > >In July 1981, Microsoft bought all rights to DOS from > >Seattle Computer. I doubt Seattle Computer had any > >intention of locking in the installed base with > >backslashes. > > Thanks for the correction. But was backslash used > as path separator in ur-DOS? Just curious. > > > ____________________________________________________________ > Get advanced SPAM filtering on Webmail or POP Mail ... Get Lycos Mail! > http://login.mail.lycos.com/r/referral?aid=27005 > -- > To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the > instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba > -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
