full-disclosure - M$ - so what should they do?

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <200406212309.i5LN9N5D024145@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
From: Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu (Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu)
Subject: M$ - so what should they do? 

On Tue, 22 Jun 2004 09:04:37 +1200, "Stuart Fox (DSL AK)" <StuartF@...acom.co.nz>  said:

> No way!  Am I the only person who still uses "copy con filename.txt" to
> create scripts and such at the command line?  Please tell me I'm not?

I think the intent is that "con as a special filename in every directory" has
to go away - you'd still be able to use

copy c:\something\con filename.txt

(Remember, us Unix people have had to use /dev/tty and /dev/null and /dev/zero
for 3 decades, and never minded that 'tty', 'null', and 'zero' didn't exist in
every single directory)....

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 226 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.grok.org.uk/pipermail/full-disclosure/attachments/20040621/0d0da659/attachment.bin