[m-dev.] [ddw at miscrit.be: mmc vs a_mmc vs mumc]

[Peter Ross]

----- Forwarded message from Dominique de Waleffe <ddw at miscrit.be> -----

From: ddw at miscrit.be (Dominique de Waleffe)
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 16:41:29 +0100
To: peter.ross at miscrit.be
Subject: mmc vs a_mmc vs mumc

Peter,

once again I have been hit by this stupid problem of having mmc.exe
in my path before the mmc shell script and after 2 hours nothing had
compiled since Microsoft Management Console had started and was
waiting for an OK which I'd not seen...

Anyway, this MMC is becoming the base for all management interfaces
in NT and win200k. It is also used by external tools also
[e.g. diskeeper 6].

Do you think it'd possible to convince your MU friends to rename [I know,
once again the files to avoid those conflicts (another exists for ml,
where ml.exe is microsoft assembler....).

My suggestion would be to: 

mmc -> mumc for Melb. Univ Merc Compiler
ml -> muml for Melb. Univ Merc Linker

An alternative approach would be to give explicit extensions to the
shell scripts and make the installation scripts use the 

ftype command to install an association and pathext to make sure the
shell scripts are seen before the executables.

Setting up PATH from bashrc is not a sufficient solution as not all
tools will be children of bash (eg Emacs started from the desktop,
etc). So the default mercury path should be set in the
system/environment of the control panel. But: the system path (with
mmc in) is forced before the user path by the system...)

What do you think?

D.


----- End forwarded message -----
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
mercury-developers mailing list
Post messages to:       mercury-developers at cs.mu.oz.au
Administrative Queries: owner-mercury-developers at cs.mu.oz.au
Subscriptions:          mercury-developers-request at cs.mu.oz.au
--------------------------------------------------------------------------