SOLUTION (Was: Unix handles file extensions "very poorly"?

On 16 December 2011 17:43, Fred Cisin <cisin at xenosoft.com> wrote: Ahahaha! :?) Steady on, old chap. Pop a few more dried frog pills and calm down. Joking aside, I have considered it. I honestly think a decent Win9x/NT-style DOS shell for Linux would help its adoption by Windows techies moving across. The main snag being that C21 Windows techies barely use the CLI at all and are not really skilled in it, whereas 1990s or even 1980s MS techies probably know Unix already. I did start, in the early 1990s, a COMMAND-COM compatible shell for Acorn RISC OS. Its native CLI is deeply odd, as it dates back to the late '70s/early '80s and owes nothing to anything - it was all original. (Examples: directories are called Catalogues and are listed with CAT; their names are separated in paths with dots, rooted at filesystemname::devicenumber:$.; there are no native file extensions but when needed they are simulated with slashes, so an MS-DOS file called C:\DOS\COUNTRY.SYS would be something like dosfs::4:$.DOS.COUNTRY/SYS (allowing for ::0 to ::3 being 4 floppy drives). It was... weird.) I only got as far as DIR, COPY, DEL and TREE and got distracted and moved on. But I'd love a DOS shell for Linux, yes. If I had the skills, I'd try to do it. Partly for the convenience, partly for fun, partly for the sheer joy of outraging traditional old-time Unix-heads. :?) -- Liam Proven ? Info & profile: http://www.google.com/profiles/lproven Email: lproven at cix.co.uk ? GMail/GoogleTalk/Orkut: lproven at gmail.com Tel: +44 20-8685-0498 ? Cell: +44 7939-087884 ? Fax: + 44 870-9151419 AIM/Yahoo/Skype: liamproven ? MSN: lproven at hotmail.com ? ICQ: 73187508