Re: Alternate file types for RUN ?
- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 18:57:27 -0400
FredK wrote:
Changing the extension would have itself caused pain - as many command files
and other things look for .EXE as the extension for an image.
What I was suggesting is first look for .EXE, and only if it fails, then
look for architecture specific type (.EXE_VAX, .EXE_ALPHA, .EXE_8086 etc)
This way, default behaviour is not changed. But you can then setup some
applications to have multiple architectures in the same file name
(ifferent extensions) and eahc gets activated with the same command (
RUN CHOCOLATE for instance).
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Alternate file types for RUN ?
- From: Stephen Hoffman
- Re: Alternate file types for RUN ?
- References:
- Alternate file types for RUN ?
- From: JF Mezei
- Re: Alternate file types for RUN ?
- From: davidc
- Re: Alternate file types for RUN ?
- From: FredK
- Alternate file types for RUN ?
- Prev by Date: Re: DS10L surgery report
- Next by Date: Re: Alternate file types for RUN ?
- Previous by thread: Re: Alternate file types for RUN ?
- Next by thread: Re: Alternate file types for RUN ?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|