On 7/21/2014 5:07 PM, Rugxulo wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 6:40 PM, Ralf Quint wrote:
>> Sorry for making a test, but it seems my previous emails never made it
>> to the list (or I am getting censored :-( )
> I don't know why that would be. Speaking only as an uninformed end
> user, I
Hi,
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 6:40 PM, Ralf Quint wrote:
>
> Sorry for making a test, but it seems my previous emails never made it
> to the list (or I am getting censored :-( )
I don't know why that would be. Speaking only as an uninformed end
user, I don't know what anti-spam software would even
Sorry for making a test, but it seems my previous emails never made it
to the list (or I am getting censored :-( )
Ralf
---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection
is active.
http://www.avast.com
-
Am 20.07.2014 20:53, schrieb Eric Auer:
> Hi Juan,
>
> It is still not fully clear to me how different DOS differs
> regarding the "arguments passed to batch" situation... Even
> if 4DOS solves it, what exactly is the difference in style?
May be that the most important issue here is to understand
Hi,
On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 4:52 AM, Jim Michaels wrote:
> On 7/19/2014 4:20 AM, Rugxulo wrote:
>>
>>> the new alpha cygwin DJGPP compiler's host is I think any version of
>>> windows possibly even x64 cpu -
>>> it must be compiled right now, a binary may be later. the target is still
>>> DOS i
