[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: MinGW vs. c-api.test
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
Re: MinGW vs. c-api.test |
Date: |
Tue, 10 Jun 2014 21:00:44 +0300 |
> From: David Kastrup <address@hidden>
> Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 17:56:46 +0200
>
> Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:
>
> >> Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 10:05:52 +0100
> >> From: Neil Jerram <address@hidden>
> >>
> >> On 2014-06-09 20:32, address@hidden wrote:
> >> > What’s the name of /dev/null on Windows?
> >>
> >> NUL
> >
> > Yes, "nul" case-insensitively.
>
> If I remember correctly, even something like C:\tmp\nul.txt would serve
> as null device
Yes, any file name whose basename is nul.WHATEVER is also a null
device. "nul" is just the simplest form of all possible ones.
> though I cannot vouch for this remaining true with NT-based Windows
> systems. It was the case for those versions running on top of MSDOS
> I'm pretty sure.
It still works on modern Windows systems as well.
MinGW vs. c-api.test, Ludovic Courtès, 2014/06/09
- Re: MinGW vs. c-api.test, Neil Jerram, 2014/06/10
- Re: MinGW vs. c-api.test, Ludovic Courtès, 2014/06/10
- Re: MinGW vs. c-api.test, Eli Zaretskii, 2014/06/10
- Re: MinGW vs. c-api.test, David Kastrup, 2014/06/10
- Re: MinGW vs. c-api.test,
Eli Zaretskii <=
- Re: MinGW vs. c-api.test, dsmich, 2014/06/10
- Re: MinGW vs. c-api.test, Eli Zaretskii, 2014/06/10
Re: MinGW vs. c-api.test, Ludovic Courtès, 2014/06/10
- Re: MinGW vs. c-api.test, Eli Zaretskii, 2014/06/10
- Re: MinGW vs. c-api.test, Ludovic Courtès, 2014/06/11
- Re: MinGW vs. c-api.test, Eli Zaretskii, 2014/06/11
- Re: MinGW vs. c-api.test, Ludovic Courtès, 2014/06/12
- Re: MinGW vs. c-api.test, Eli Zaretskii, 2014/06/12
- Re: MinGW vs. c-api.test, Ludovic Courtès, 2014/06/12
- Re: MinGW vs. c-api.test, Eli Zaretskii, 2014/06/12