FILES.BBS instead of DESCRIPT.ION

[Ralf Brinkmann]

Hi there!

In TCMD or TCC I would like to use FILES.BBS instead of DESCRIPT.ION as
a description file (as I did this since v4.0), because I already have a
lot of these files.

But TCMD and TCC don't accept this. If I type it manually as
"DescriptionName" in the TCMD.INI, it doesn't show the descriptions, if
I use the configuration tool of TCMD, something changes the entry in the
*.ini file into "DescriptionName=ll". When I open the configuration tool
again, the field is empty again.

In the old 4DOS and 4NT it works properly.

Gruß, Ralf

[Stan Brown]

Post by Ralf Brinkmann
Hi there!
In TCMD or TCC I would like to use FILES.BBS instead of DESCRIPT.ION as
a description file (as I did this since v4.0), because I already have a
lot of these files.
But TCMD and TCC don't accept this. If I type it manually as
"DescriptionName" in the TCMD.INI, it doesn't show the descriptions, if
I use the configuration tool of TCMD, something changes the entry in the
*.ini file into "DescriptionName=ll". When I open the configuration tool
again, the field is empty again.
In the old 4DOS and 4NT it works properly.
Gruß, Ralf

I don't use descriptions, but the help file says you can set the file
name via the OPTION command. Have you tried that? Yes, it *should*
be the same as editing the .INI file, but ..

[Ralf Brinkmann]

Hallo Stan!

Post by Stan Brown

[...] if I use the configuration tool of TCMD, something changes the
entry in the *.ini file into "DescriptionName=ll". [...]

I don't use descriptions, but the help file says you can set the file
name via the OPTION command. Have you tried that?

Yes. If I use the OPTION command, it also opens the OPION menu of Take
Command with the configuration tool. In the help file they don't report
about any special difficulties or conditions for the description file.
So FILES.BBS should be an allowed name. And it worked all the years with
the old versions. Many years ago every Sysop used this possibility to
describe the files in his mailbox system.

Gruß, Ralf

[Ralf Brinkmann]

Hallo Stan!

the help file says you can set the file name via the OPTION command.
Have you tried that?

By the way: I have also tried out the configuration for the Take Command
section, but it's the same result. I can type the filename in, but
finally it's not in the *.ini file and when I open the OPTION command or
menu again the field for the filename is empty.

In the configuration command for Take Command the field is left
justified, for TCC it's right justified. Also strange.

Gruß, Ralf

[Stan Brown]

Post by Ralf Brinkmann

the help file says you can set the file name via the OPTION command.
Have you tried that?

By the way: I have also tried out the configuration for the Take Command
section, but it's the same result. I can type the filename in, but
finally it's not in the *.ini file and when I open the OPTION command or
menu again the field for the filename is empty.
In the configuration command for Take Command the field is left
justified, for TCC it's right justified. Also strange.

Sorry, that was my only idea. :-(

[Ralf Brinkmann]

Hallo Stan!

Post by Stan Brown
Sorry, that was my only idea. :-(

Thank you, that you read and answer my probably stupid (for most other
people) questions. Maybe I try out the NTFS descriptions.

Gruß, Ralf

[E. S. Fabian]

Post by Ralf Brinkmann
By the way: I have also tried out the configuration for the Take Command
section, but it's the same result. I can type the filename in, but
finally it's not in the *.ini file and when I open the OPTION command or
menu again the field for the filename is empty.
In the configuration command for Take Command the field is left
justified, for TCC it's right justified. Also strange.

Suggest you use the _ININAME internal variable to locate TCC's
configuration file, and verify it is not READ ONLY, and that it is the same
as the one you manually modified. If the modification was actually made, and
is not obeyed report it directly to ***@jpsoft.com. BTW, this may be
an option directive which is processed only when TCC starts, so you may need
to restart TCC to see its effects.
I have not tried it here.

[Stan Brown]

Post by E. S. Fabian
Suggest you use the _ININAME internal variable to locate TCC's
configuration file, and verify it is not READ ONLY, and that it is the same
as the one you manually modified.

I have to second that suggestion, and I wish I had made it myself.
:-)

As soon as I read what Steve wrote, I remembered I had made exactly
the same mistake myself in setting up my present system this month.
I can't remember how I managed it, but I had a TCMD.INI file in a
different folder from the one TCCLE was looking at, and I wondered
why none of my changes were honored. :-)

[Ralf Brinkmann]

Hallo Steve and Stan!

Post by Stan Brown

Post by E. S. Fabian
Suggest you use the _ININAME internal variable to locate TCC's
configuration file, and verify it is not READ ONLY, and that it is
the same as the one you manually modified.

I can't remember how I managed it, but I had a TCMD.INI file in a
different folder from the one TCCLE was looking at, and I wondered
why none of my changes were honored. :-)

No, there is absolutely no other JPSOFT-folder or another *.INI file
anywhere. I have switched everything to my TCMD folder in the startbatch
and beside that the help file says, that the order to look for the *.INI
file is

1) your .INI file is named TCMD.INI, and
2) it is in one of the following directories:
2.1) the same directory as TCC
2.2) the %localappdata% directory.

Further there is a change in the *.INI file. If I write my
"DescriptionName=FILES.BBS" in the *.IN file and after that use the
OPTION command or the configuration tool in Take Command, the field to
enter the name is empty. If I add FILES.BBS again and save the settings,
the line in the *.INI file is changed to "DescriptionName=11".

I found out another strange thing: If I use the manually edited *.INI
file with "FILES.BBS", Take Command or TCC don't show the file
descriptions (in the Prompt window). But in the list view of Take
Command the descriptions are shown!!! Really! And there is no other
description file, it uses the existing FILES.BBS.

I have tried to register for the JPSoft forums, but at this moment I
still don't have a permission to write there. So maybe later I can ask
the people there, what they found out (searching fo a similar theme was
not successfull).

Confused, Ralf

[Stan Brown]

Post by Ralf Brinkmann
Hallo Steve and Stan!

Post by Stan Brown

Post by E. S. Fabian
Suggest you use the _ININAME internal variable to locate TCC's
configuration file, and verify it is not READ ONLY, and that it is
the same as the one you manually modified.

I can't remember how I managed it, but I had a TCMD.INI file in a
different folder from the one TCCLE was looking at, and I wondered
why none of my changes were honored. :-)

No, there is absolutely no other JPSOFT-folder or another *.INI file
anywhere.
Confused, Ralf

Did you follow Steve's suggestion? At the command prompt type
echo %_ininame
and make sure that you have been editing the correct file.

Also, as he pointed out, some changes require shutting down and
restarting TCC, which in practice means logging off of Windows and
logging back on.

[E. S. Fabian]

Post by Stan Brown
Also, as he pointed out, some changes require shutting down and
restarting TCC, which in practice means logging off of Windows and
logging back on.

I never needed to log out from the Windows session to stop and restart
TCC. Even when TCC runs in an unbreakable loop (e.g. you disabled Ctrl-C and
ctrl-Break before starting the loop) I could terminate it from another TCC
instance, using the TASKEND command with the /F option. The only
complicating factor is SHRALIAS.EXE, which would remain running if even if
you close all TCC instances; you just need need to execute SHRALIAS /U in
one of the TCC instances before closing all instances.

[Stan Brown]

Post by E. S. Fabian

Post by Stan Brown
Also, as he pointed out, some changes require shutting down and
restarting TCC, which in practice means logging off of Windows and
logging back on.

I never needed to log out from the Windows session to stop and restart
TCC. Even when TCC runs in an unbreakable loop (e.g. you disabled Ctrl-C and
ctrl-Break before starting the loop) I could terminate it from another TCC
instance, using the TASKEND command with the /F option. The only
complicating factor is SHRALIAS.EXE, which would remain running if even if
you close all TCC instances; you just need need to execute SHRALIAS /U in
one of the TCC instances before closing all instances.

Sorry, Steve, I must have misunderstood what you said earlier.
Thanks for the clarification.

[Ralf Brinkmann]

Hallo Stan!

Post by Stan Brown
Did you follow Steve's suggestion? At the command prompt type
echo %_ininame
and make sure that you have been editing the correct file.

Yes, of course, and everything else in the *.INI file is working. And
Take Command (or the configuration part of OPTIONS) is changing the
correct file, but in an incorrect way.

Post by Stan Brown
Also, as he pointed out, some changes require shutting down and
restarting TCC, which in practice means logging off of Windows and
logging back on.

That's so self-evident, that I did'nt mention it.

Today in the morning I tried out something else: I edited the TCMD.INI
manually again with "DescriptionName=FILES.BBS", saved the file and then
opened the configuration dialog in the OPTIONS. As before the inputfield
for the description filename was empty. I typed in "DESCRIPT.ION" and
saved the settings. Now I opened the TCMD.INI with an editor again. And
what had Take Command done? It has changed the line to
"DescriptionName=D:\Progs\4DOS\DATA". That's the location of my
JPSTREE.IDX, the Treepath. Very funny. I guess there is a little Harry
Potter living in Take Command.

No, I don't have a virus on my computer.

Cheers from Germany with 4°C, Ralf

[Klaus Meinhard]

Hallo Ralf,

I see you finally found your way to JP Software's support form :-)
Hope you find a solution there.

Meanwhile: what OS are you using? Under Vista and Win7 an activated
User Access Control will prevent TCC to write anything to the
Programme(x86) folder. So you should really try

EChO %_ininame

to see which ini file TCC is reading.

[Ralf Brinkmann]

Hallo Klaus!

Post by Klaus Meinhard
Meanwhile: what OS are you using?

Again: Don't you see my signature? It's Windows XP Home SP3.

Post by Klaus Meinhard
So you should really try
EChO %_ininame

Ok, again: D:\Progs\TCMD12\TCMD.INI

Post by Klaus Meinhard
to see which ini file TCC is reading.

That's the right one. For Take Command. For TCC it's
D:\Progs\TCC\TCMD.INI. Also the right one. I'm testing both new versions
beside my old 4DOS and 4NT.

Gruß, Ralf

[JJ]

Post by Ralf Brinkmann
Hallo Klaus!

Post by Klaus Meinhard
Meanwhile: what OS are you using?

Again: Don't you see my signature? It's Windows XP Home SP3.

Post by Klaus Meinhard
So you should really try
EChO %_ininame

Ok, again: D:\Progs\TCMD12\TCMD.INI

Post by Klaus Meinhard
to see which ini file TCC is reading.

That's the right one. For Take Command. For TCC it's
D:\Progs\TCC\TCMD.INI. Also the right one. I'm testing both new versions
beside my old 4DOS and 4NT.
Gruß, Ralf

My guess is that there are bugs in Take Command product. Here are what I
have found.

I did a binary file search and found that the "DescriptionName"
configuration directive is only referenced by TCMD.EXE file only (in
Unicode text). Not TCC.EXE nor NT.EXE have a reference of that text.

The fact that the description file name can't be changed by the option
dialog (even in TCMD.EXE), made me think that the option dialog code
itself has a bug. A manual INI file modification is still effective, as
you have said.

The "//DescriptionName=FILES.BBS" command line option for TCC.EXE and
NT.EXE are also ineffective.

The only workaround I could find is to use SETDOS /D"FILES.BBS" command
for TCC initialization via TCSTART.BTM or via TCC.EXE "/C" or "/K"
command line option.

[Klaus Meinhard]

Post by JJ
My guess is that there are bugs in Take Command product. Here are
what I have found.

It seems the bug has already been fixed by Rex in the newest version.

This shows that it was a good step by Ralf to join the oficial support
forum and bring his problem to Rex's attention.

[E. S. Fabian]

Post by Klaus Meinhard

Post by JJ
My guess is that there are bugs in Take Command product. Here are
what I have found.

It seems the bug has already been fixed by Rex in the newest version.
This shows that it was a good step by Ralf to join the oficial support
forum and bring his problem to Rex's attention.

And the speed with which Rex responds to legitimate complaints - but
only if submitted in the proper forum!

[Ralf Brinkmann]

Hallo Klaus!

Post by Klaus Meinhard
It seems the bug has already been fixed by Rex in the newest version.
This shows that it was a good step by Ralf to join the oficial support
forum and bring his problem to Rex's attention.

But... go on reading. There is still a mistake. No descriptions.

Gruß, Ralf

[Ralf Brinkmann]

Hello All!

Post by Ralf Brinkmann
But... go on reading. There is still a mistake. No descriptions.

The new build 38 runs without problems. All descriptions are visible.

Gruß, Ralf

[Ralf Brinkmann]

Hi everybody!

Post by Ralf Brinkmann
The new build 38 runs without problems. All descriptions are visible.

Now I'm wondering, if I'm going to use NTFS descriptions. The advantage
would be, that I can see the descriptions even in the normal windows
explorer and similar file handling programms, like Idoswin. But how can
I copy the old descriptions from FILES.BBS (or whatever you use) into
the comments field in the NTFS summary information? Does anybody have an
idea?

And how can I combine the advantages of the normal Windows DIR command
with DIR /Z? So: Long filenames but with descriptions. Similar to this:

Verzeichnis von D:\Progs\4DOS\*

21.11.2010 04:55 <DIR> .
21.11.2010 04:55 <DIR> ..
01.11.2008 21:40 <DIR> 4DOS750
01.11.2008 21:40 <DIR> DATA
07.10.1995 18:00 1.925 4DHELP.TXT
24.08.2004 06:50 265.944 4DOS.COM 4DOS program file
17.04.1996 05:52 237.632 4DOS.DOC
26.06.1993 23:12 690.602 4DOS.DOK
24.08.2004 06:50 803.106 4DOS.HLP 4DOS help text
24.08.2004 06:50 766 4DOS.ICO Icon file for 4DOS
under Windows
03.11.2008 21:18 891 4DOS.INI
27.03.2008 17:17 2.857 4DOS.PIF
09.09.2002 00:01 181.912 4DOS.TXT 4DOS, 4NT, TC32
Intro/Install Guide
25.12.1993 23:50 25.213 4DOSINI.DOK
17.04.1996 05:52 766 4DOSM.ICO
16.04.1999 06:02 3.646 4DOSOS2.ICO
17.04.1996 05:52 874 4DOSOS2A.ICO
17.04.1996 05:52 874 4DOSOS2B.ICO
27.10.1994 10:14 166.810 4DOSP.COM
21.12.2001 07:01 259.184 4DOS_COM.OLD
17.04.1996 05:51 187.706 4DOS_COM.ORG
24.08.2004 06:50 59.792 4HELP.EXE 4DOS help program
14.11.2010 09:01 343 4START.BTM
15.11.2010 21:25 2.086 ALIAS.TXT
17.04.1996 05:52 10.370 ALIASES
20.10.2003 13:53 18 ANFANG.BAT
17.04.1996 05:52 79.654 APPNOTES.DOC
14.09.2008 14:46 6.355 ASCII.BTM ASCII.BTM lets you
look up the ascii value of a character. Optionally you can copy that
character to the CTRL-INSert key (configurable), so you have it
available on your keyboard at DOS level.
07.04.1998 12:14 338 BACK.BTM Gibt einen
eingegebenen String bis 250 Zeichen in umgekehrter Reihenfolge zurück
11.03.1994 16:00 3.908 BATCHES.1
24.08.2004 06:50 11.135 BATCOMP.EXE Batch file compression
utility
24.02.2003 08:50 14.076 br4dos.exe
30.10.1992 04:01 8.598 BRAND.EXE
23.11.1993 05:00 7.690 BRAND5.EXE
19.10.1997 09:29 15.994 CAL.BTM PopUp-Kalender von
Sean P. Sullivan. Mit Korrekturen für Deutschland von Claus Müller und
Gerhard Velewald. Super!


Gruß, Ralf

[Klaus Meinhard]

Hallo Ralf,

since noboy else seems inclined to answer...

Post by Ralf Brinkmann
Now I'm wondering, if I'm going to use NTFS descriptions. The
advantage would be, that I can see the descriptions even in the
normal windows explorer and similar file handling programms, like
Idoswin. But how can I copy the old descriptions from FILES.BBS (or
whatever you use) into the comments field in the NTFS summary
information? Does anybody have an idea?

As far as I can see, you'd have to write a batch that extracts the
FILES.BBS description (FFIND) and describes the file anew the NTFS
description. Again: try this in the TC Support Forum. There might be
someone who already has such a batch or allas lying around.

Post by Ralf Brinkmann
And how can I combine the advantages of the normal Windows DIR
command with DIR /Z? So: Long filenames but with descriptions.

See the PDIR command.

Gruß,

Klaus

[Ralf Brinkmann]

Hallo Klaus!

*Klaus Meinhard*:

[FILES.BBS >NFTS description]

Post by Klaus Meinhard
As far as I can see, you'd have to write a batch that extracts the
FILES.BBS description (FFIND) and describes the file anew the NTFS
description.

That's the problem <groaning>.

Post by Klaus Meinhard
Again: try this in the TC Support Forum. There might be
someone who already has such a batch or allas lying around.

I hope this newsgroup will not die so fast!

[Long filenames but with descriptions]

Post by Klaus Meinhard
See the PDIR command.

Oh, nice toy! Thank you!

Gruß, Ralf

[E. S. Fabian]

Ralf Brinkmann:
| *Klaus Meinhard*:
|
| [FILES.BBS >NFTS description]
|
|| As far as I can see, you'd have to write a batch that extracts the
|| FILES.BBS description (FFIND) and describes the file anew the NTFS
|| description.
|
| That's the problem <groaning>.

The structure of the description file is simple. It is a plain text
file, one line for each file with description. The line consists of the
filename (LFN), a tab character, and the description. If you set NTFS
descriptions first, a very simple loop could do the job:

do line in @files.bbs
set file=%@word[0,%line]
if isfile %file describe %file /d%@word[1-9999,%line]
enddo

BEWARE! NOT TESTED!

BTW, if you also use 4DOS, or if you want to save your files to a
non-NTFS device, such as (potentially) CD-ROM, DVD-ROM, memory stick,
website, etc., you may lose all descriptions... although I have a very vague
recollection that Rex may have done a lot of extra work to create a
description file when copying or moving files to non-NTFS media.

|| Again: try this in the TC Support Forum. There might be
|| someone who already has such a batch or allas lying around.
|
| I hope this newsgroup will not die so fast!

Actually, anyone with issues not pertaining to 4DOS posting HERE is OFF
TOPIC! Though that's all I've seen here lately.

[Klaus Meinhard]

Post by E. S. Fabian
Actually, anyone with issues not pertaining to 4DOS posting HERE
is OFF TOPIC! Though that's all I've seen here lately.

I just want to remind you that quite a while back, due to the very low
ON-TOPIC traffic, the regulars here decided that all of JP Software's
command-processors could be covered here. Not that it was much help
:-)

[FileGod]

Post by JJ
My guess is that there are bugs in Take Command product. Here are what I
have found.
I did a binary file search and found that the "DescriptionName"
configuration directive is only referenced by TCMD.EXE file only (in
Unicode text). Not TCC.EXE nor NT.EXE have a reference of that text.
The fact that the description file name can't be changed by the option
dialog (even in TCMD.EXE), made me think that the option dialog code
itself has a bug. A manual INI file modification is still effective, as
you have said.
The "//DescriptionName=FILES.BBS" command line option for TCC.EXE and
NT.EXE are also ineffective.
The only workaround I could find is to use SETDOS /D"FILES.BBS" command
for TCC initialization via TCSTART.BTM or via TCC.EXE "/C" or "/K"
command line option.

I did try out Take Command & found I did not need it, I also wrote
to the folks that put it out & mentioned back then it costs more than
Windows XP Home Edition.
=8^O I do not think Take Command is 40,000,000 of code like Win Xp.
Hmm... FILES.BBS, here is the latest version of my FilesBBS.cmd, it is
just about in PC Board format, I still have a tiny bit of workon it...

@echo off
setLocal EnableDelayedExpansion
rem set Spaces=" "
set Spaces=
for /f "tokens=*" %%i in ('dir/b/on *.zip') do (
for /f "tokens=1,2" %%j in ("%%~zni") do (
pkzip25 -extract "%%i" File_id.diz>nul
title FilesBBS.cmd Adding %%i
echo Adding %%i
echo %%i %%~ti %%j Bytes>>FILES.BBS
for /F "tokens=*" %%i in (File_id.diz) do @echo %Spaces% %%i>>FILES.BBS
if not exist File_id.diz echo %Spaces% [File_id.diz not found]>>FILES.BBS
attrib -r -a -s -h File_id.diz
del File_id.diz
)
)
echo File list created with FilesBBS.cmd by FileGod>>FILES.BBS
echo www.filegod.netfirms.com>>FILES.BBS
title FilesBBS.cmd Finished
cls
exit
http://www.filegod.netfirms.com

[Klaus Meinhard]

Post by FileGod
to the folks that put it out & mentioned back then it costs more
than Windows XP Home Edition.
=8^O I do not think Take Command is 40,000,000 of code like Win Xp.
Hmm... FILES.BBS, here is the latest version of my FilesBBS.cmd, it
is just about in PC Board format, I still have a tiny bit of workon
it...

1. You should perhaps look at the latest date of this thread before
you answer. Good morning!

2. There is free (really free, no advertising, no 30 days testing
period) 4DOS (for the DOS OS), free 4OS2 (for the OS2 OS) and free
TCC/LE (for the NT type OSs), all much enhanced over the respective
original command processors of these OSs. They are all offered by JP
Software / Rex Conn.

3. WinXP or Vista or Win7 are sold several millions of times, often to
people who don't even want it (bundled with a new Computer). TC is
sold perhaps several thousand times and only to people who recognize
its worth.

4 You don't need it because you're a batch hobbyist who delights in
producing contorted solutions with a sad and truly minmalist tool, the
MS batch language. Go to an environment where time is money, where
program code has to be readable and servicable not only by its author,
and the price of TC becomes negligible.

5. Your try at writing a FilesBBS command is only reinventing the
wheel that is running in JP Software's command processors for 15
years. Moreover, it is slow, because it has to be interpreted line by
line and does only run in one OS environment. There was a reason that
all BBS operators used 4DOS.

6. Your batch is off-topic here anyway, because this newsgroup is for
discussions of 4DOS, and by extension, the newer command processors of
JP Sofware. Try amb.nt.

[FileGod]

"Klaus Meinhard" <***@gmx.de> wrote:
One thing I like about building my own computer it not having to buy
another operating system, maybe there should be a law where you should
have a choice about there being a bundled OS that is not free, is there
a kickback from Microsoft or something, ReactOS, Linux & tons of other
freee operating systems are out there.

When I ran my BBS I was not using 4DOS & to my knowlegde none of the
sysops I knew here using it.

I did just try FilesBBS.cmd with TCC/LE 11.40 & it worked, not
perfectly but with minor changes a FilesBBS.BTM should be easy to
create so it is not really off topic.
Is there a Bat2BTM out there, I have not checked yet but a Bat2BTM
should not be too hard to create, heck I made a online Bat2Bash
converter & have it running on my website.

Whats Try amb.nt?

That TCC/LE sure dos do a lot more that the command.com or cmd.exe, it is
more like having the power of Perl in comparision.

http://www.filegod.netfirms.com

[E. S. Fabian]

FileGod:
...
| Is there a Bat2BTM out there, I have not checked yet but a Bat2BTM
| should not be too hard to create, heck I made a online Bat2Bash
| converter & have it running on my website.

Don't need it. Any .BAT file (i.e. a batch program intended to be
interpreted by COMMAND.COM) is executed correctly by TCC.

|
| Whats Try amb.nt?

It is a NG for NT-related issues.

|
| That TCC/LE sure dos do a lot more that the command.com or cmd.exe,
| it is more like having the power of Perl in comparision.

Yet it is still far less powerful than the commercial version.

[FileGod]

Post by E. S. Fabian
| That TCC/LE sure dos do a lot more that the command.com or cmd.exe,
| it is more like having the power of Perl in comparision.
Yet it is still far less powerful than the commercial version.

Oh well, TCC/LE will have to do for now, I have to try it out more
than one night, to me the most important needs for me with script
languages is handling strings of text, I have been trying to write a
batch file for a few days to create File_id.diz files from file lists,
I still am not sure if it can be done, maybe the 4DOS language would be
easier after I get a hang of it.

Maybe a Basic2BTM could even be written, its too early for to even
make a guess on that. The online converters can be a pain since then
you are dealing with four languages, HTML for the forms, a interpreter
such as Perl & the languages you want to have it convert to & from.
Now I wish I started grabbing BTM's years ago =8-)

[E. S. Fabian]

FileGod:
| Maybe a Basic2BTM could even be written, its too early for to even
| make a guess on that. The online converters can be a pain since then
| you are dealing with four languages, HTML for the forms, a
| interpreter such as Perl & the languages you want to have it convert
| to & from. Now I wish I started grabbing BTM's years ago =8-)

Not very likely. A basic problem inherited from COMMAND.COM is that TCC
does not normally distinguish between strings that are data value and
strings that are part of command text. In BASIC there is a complete
dichotomy between command text and data value (values of variables and
functions). Not easily overcome, if at all possible.

[Klaus Meinhard]

Post by FileGod
One thing I like about building my own computer it not having to buy
another operating system, maybe there should be a law where you
should have a choice about there being a bundled OS that is not
free, is there a kickback from Microsoft or something, ReactOS,
Linux & tons of other freee operating systems are out there.

Yes, but what has that to do with anything in this thread?

Post by FileGod
When I ran my BBS I was not using 4DOS & to my knowlegde none of the
sysops I knew here using it.

Pity. It was free for BBS sysops.

Post by FileGod
I did just try FilesBBS.cmd with TCC/LE 11.40 & it worked, not
perfectly but with minor changes a FilesBBS.BTM should be easy to
create so it is not really off topic.

TCC batch is very compatible with CMD batch, so you really can run
most batches unchanged. To really use the added power of TCC I'd
recommend that you start TCC, hit F1 for HELP, and study the commend
DO ... ENDDO (as a possible replacement for your FOR loops). From
there you could go to IFF ... THEN ... ELSEIFF ... ENDIFF. Written
that way you batch would look so much clearer.

Post by FileGod
Is there a Bat2BTM out there, I have not checked yet but a Bat2BTM
should not be too hard to create, heck I made a online Bat2Bash
converter & have it running on my website.

You really don't need that. What you need is a good read of the Help
file.

Post by FileGod
Whats Try amb.nt?

alt.msdos.batch.nt, where, as it is, TCC batch would be on topic,
while CMD batch isn't here :-)

Post by FileGod
That TCC/LE sure dos do a lot more that the command.com or cmd.exe,
it is more like having the power of Perl in comparision.

So use it. You can trash a lot of external utils, all with a different
syntax and (probably) awful documentation. Youi can write much clearer
code faster, using structuring commands, subroutines, aliases, and
functions, in a fraction of the time you need in CMD.

[FileGod]

Post by Klaus Meinhard

Post by FileGod
When I ran my BBS I was not using 4DOS & to my knowlegde none of the
sysops I knew here using it.

Pity. It was free for BBS sysops.

Oh, is that right, I did see 4DOS stuff on the BBS's && in Fido...

Post by Klaus Meinhard
TCC batch is very compatible with CMD batch, so you really can run
most batches unchanged. To really use the added power of TCC I'd
recommend that you start TCC, hit F1 for HELP, and study the commend
DO ... ENDDO (as a possible replacement for your FOR loops). From
there you could go to IFF ... THEN ... ELSEIFF ... ENDIFF. Written
that way you batch would look so much clearer.

Oh boy, I guess I opened up another can of worms by trying another
computer language heheh, it takes a while to count all of them I played
with, I did just start studying C++ just to get some of the basics.

It's pretty neat seeing color options in the BTM's (Look Ma, no ANSI!).

Post by Klaus Meinhard
So use it. You can trash a lot of external utils, all with a different
syntax and (probably) awful documentation. Youi can write much clearer
code faster, using structuring commands, subroutines, aliases, and
functions, in a fraction of the time you need in CMD.

I was shocked when I switched over to Win Xp that a couple of the
programs I wrote did not work right but thats taken care of now.

Oh, you got a visit from me @ www.4dos.info , it was a pretty good
start for me!

Well have a good one Klaus!