Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 09:49:25 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> To: nate@mt.sri.com (Nate Williams) Cc: terry@lambert.org, nate@mt.sri.com, hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Sun Workshop compiler vs. GCC? Message-ID: <199702201649.JAA15306@phaeton.artisoft.com> In-Reply-To: <199702200150.SAA25151@rocky.mt.sri.com> from "Nate Williams" at Feb 19, 97 06:50:56 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> So am I. It's irrelevant, as well as all of your other 'claims to > fame'. We're talking about what Win95 upgrades do, not what kind of > developer you are. You stated that Win95 doesn't use DOS devices when > an upgrade occurs, and you're wrong. Plain wrong. You can argue about > how you are misinformed, misaligned, misunderstood, but in fact you are > plain mistaken. Wrong. Define "when an upgrade occurs". If you mean "in the default configuration after an upgrade has been completed and the machine rebooted to invoke the 'runonce' registry entries created by install and run in real mode as part of the post-install", yes, I said that. > I don't have to explain it, only I can say with absolute and completey > knowledge that you're wrong. Your faith is uplifting, but misplaced. 8-). > C'mon, I *really* want to see you admit you're wrong instead of changing > the subject to something like how many times you've installed it and > never seen it happen, or what you read, or something else. You're > simply *wrong* It isn't going to happen until I see a Windows95 install not rename config.sys and autoexec.bat, or until I disassemble another io.sys and see a string reference to "autoexec.dos" or "config.dos". Regards, Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199702201649.JAA15306>