[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       ethereal-dev
Subject:    [Ethereal-dev] Re: Re: [Ethereal-users] timestamp problem
From:       jfielding () ra ! rockwell ! com
Date:       2004-01-30 20:53:11
Message-ID: OF1E42E2C2.B7A42994-ON80256E2B.004A8AF7 () ra ! rockwell ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

This is a multipart message in MIME format.

--=_alternative 007266CE80256E2B_=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Martin Regner wrote:
> J Fielding wrrote:
> > 
> > It's only in bat files that % is treated specially, when you must say 
%%
> > to mean the % char. So a batch file to text2pcap <name>.txt to 
<name>.eth
> > might say:

> When I use % on my Windows 98 Swedish Edition from command line I get the
> problem - but not on Windows 2000, so it's not only related to bat-files. 


I did a few tests and it looks like this is what Windows does with % on 
the command line: In all versions tested, if the line contains %any text% 
look for environment variable ANY TEXT, replace with expansion if found. 
If not found, NT restores the original text but OT does not.
Tested with:
NT: WinNT4, Win2k
OT: Win95 (and Martin's previous Win98 tests were effectively the same)
Typical test: echo %test%junk

The %% work-around does work on Win95, so echo %%path%% gives %path%. It 
doesn't work on WinNT - it gives %expansion of PATH%.

So in dos/windows % is treated specially in bat files. And in command 
lines (inconsistently). And in the "for" command. And in the command lines 
in Windows shortcuts. And in whatever else I forgot . . .

It is therefore a good idea to not require the use of % in any program's 
command line arguments.

Julian.
--=_alternative 007266CE80256E2B_=
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"


<br><font size=2 face="Courier New">Martin Regner wrote:</font>
<br><font size=2 face="Courier New">&gt;J Fielding wrrote:<br>
&gt;&gt; <br>
&gt;&gt; It's only in bat files that % is treated specially, when you must say \
%%</font> <br><font size=2 face="Courier New">&gt;&gt; to mean the % char. So a batch \
file to text2pcap &lt;name&gt;.txt to &lt;name&gt;.eth<br> &gt;&gt; might say:<br>
<br>
&gt;When I use % on my Windows 98 Swedish Edition from command line I get the</font>
<br><font size=2 face="Courier New">&gt;problem - but not on Windows 2000, so it's \
not only related to bat-files. <br> </font>
<br><font size=2 face="Courier New">I did a few tests and it looks like this is what \
Windows does with % on the command line: In all versions tested, if the line contains \
%any text% look for environment variable ANY TEXT, replace with expansion if found. \
If not found, NT restores the original text but OT does not.</font> <br><font size=2 \
face="Courier New">Tested with:</font> <br><font size=2 face="Courier New">NT: \
WinNT4, Win2k</font> <br><font size=2 face="Courier New">OT: Win95 (and Martin's \
previous Win98 tests were effectively the same)</font> <br><font size=2 face="Courier \
New">Typical test: echo %test%junk</font> <br>
<br><font size=2 face="Courier New">The %% work-around does work on Win95, so echo \
%%path%% gives %path%. It doesn't work on WinNT - it gives %expansion of \
PATH%.</font> <br>
<br><font size=2 face="Courier New">So in dos/windows % is treated specially in bat \
files. And in command lines (inconsistently). And in the &quot;for&quot; command. And \
in the command lines in Windows shortcuts. And in whatever else I forgot . . .</font> \
<br> <br><font size=2 face="Courier New">It is therefore a good idea to not require \
the use of % in any program's command line arguments.</font> <br>
<br><font size=2 face="Courier New">Julian.</font>
--=_alternative 007266CE80256E2B_=--



_______________________________________________
Ethereal-dev mailing list
Ethereal-dev@ethereal.com
http://www.ethereal.com/mailman/listinfo/ethereal-dev


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

Configure | About | News | Add a list | Sponsored by KoreLogic