Why can the batch command choice be executed under MS-DOS but not under pure DOS?
China DOS Union
Union site: www.cn-dos.net Forum site: www.cn-dos.net/forum
DOS stands for freedom, openness and progress. Let us work hard, learn from the openness and GNU spirit of FreeDOS and Linux, and together build and grow a free GNU GPL world!
中国DOS联盟论坛 » DOS批处理 & 脚本技术（批处理室） » Why can't the batch command choice be executed under DOS?
View 2,067 Replies 11
Original Poster
Posted 2004-02-05 00:00 · 中国 广东 广州 中移铁通
初级用户
★
Credits 113
Posts 3
Joined 2004-02-05 00:00
22-year member
UID 16787
Gender Male
Posts 3
Joined 2004-02-05 00:00
22-year member
UID 16787
Gender Male
Status Offline
Floor 2
Posted 2004-02-06 00:00 · 中国 山西 太原 联通
中级用户
★
Credits 206
Posts 22
Joined 2004-02-05 00:00
22-year member
UID 16772
Gender Male
Posts 22
Joined 2004-02-05 00:00
22-year member
UID 16772
Gender Male
Status Offline
The choice can only be used in operating systems of Windows XP and above.
Floor 3
Posted 2004-02-06 00:00 · 中国 广东 佛山 禅城区 电信
初级用户
★
Credits 159
Posts 14
Joined 2004-02-02 00:00
22-year member
UID 16524
Gender Male
Posts 14
Joined 2004-02-02 00:00
22-year member
UID 16524
Gender Male
Status Offline
So, maybe it has something to do with the DOS version of choise..
Floor 4
Posted 2004-02-06 00:00 · 中国 山西 太原 联通
中级用户
★
Credits 206
Posts 22
Joined 2004-02-05 00:00
22-year member
UID 16772
Gender Male
Posts 22
Joined 2004-02-05 00:00
22-year member
UID 16772
Gender Male
Status Offline
Yes. Versions above 7.1 can be used.
Floor 5
Posted 2004-02-06 00:00 · 中国 山西 太原 联通
元老会员
★★★★
Batchinger
Credits 4,432
Posts 1,512
Joined 2002-10-18 00:00
23-year member
UID 19
Gender Male
Posts 1,512
Joined 2002-10-18 00:00
23-year member
UID 19
Gender Male
Status Offline
Re dengyongbin:
Maybe the %path% search path is not set.
Re 骨灰龙:
Your understanding is very problematic. Starting from DOS6, there has been choice, and the same version of the system can be completely mutually compatible. The choice under 98 can completely be used in the pure DOS mode of DOS7.1. The problem of dengyongbin is probably not related to the version.
Maybe the %path% search path is not set.
Re 骨灰龙:
Your understanding is very problematic. Starting from DOS6, there has been choice, and the same version of the system can be completely mutually compatible. The choice under 98 can completely be used in the pure DOS mode of DOS7.1. The problem of dengyongbin is probably not related to the version.
※ Batchinger 致 Bat Fans：请访问 批处理编程的异类 ，欢迎交流与共享批处理编程心得！
Floor 6
Posted 2004-02-06 00:00 · 中国 广东 广州 中移铁通
初级用户
★
Credits 113
Posts 3
Joined 2004-02-05 00:00
22-year member
UID 16787
Gender Male
Posts 3
Joined 2004-02-05 00:00
22-year member
UID 16787
Gender Male
Status Offline
Thank you for everyone's enthusiastic help!
Floor 7
Posted 2004-02-09 00:00 · 中国 山西 太原 联通
中级用户
★
Credits 206
Posts 22
Joined 2004-02-05 00:00
22-year member
UID 16772
Gender Male
Posts 22
Joined 2004-02-05 00:00
22-year member
UID 16772
Gender Male
Status Offline
Re: willsort
Thanks for the advice. It's indeed my mistake. I apologize for my previous comment.
But I found that there are actually two versions of choice.
In win2003server, there is a file called choice.exe, while the choice we are talking about is the choice.com file that comes with DOS. The two files are very different in size but have the same function.
Choice.exe can indeed only be used in systems above XP.
Thanks for the advice. It's indeed my mistake. I apologize for my previous comment.
But I found that there are actually two versions of choice.
In win2003server, there is a file called choice.exe, while the choice we are talking about is the choice.com file that comes with DOS. The two files are very different in size but have the same function.
Choice.exe can indeed only be used in systems above XP.
Floor 8
Posted 2004-02-09 00:00 · 中国 浙江 杭州 电信
银牌会员
★★
三生缘里笑红尘
Credits 1,063
Posts 292
Joined 2003-03-09 00:00
23-year member
UID 1073
Gender Male
Posts 292
Joined 2003-03-09 00:00
23-year member
UID 1073
Gender Male
Status Offline
Can it be extracted? I want it!
Floor 9
Posted 2004-02-10 00:00 · 中国 山西 运城 联通
元老会员
★★★★
Batchinger
Credits 4,432
Posts 1,512
Joined 2002-10-18 00:00
23-year member
UID 19
Gender Male
Posts 1,512
Joined 2002-10-18 00:00
23-year member
UID 19
Gender Male
Status Offline
Re: Ashes Dragon:
So that's how it is. I know very little about WINNT. That CHOICE.EXE is probably a 32-bit version.
After all that talk, it all comes down to blaming MS, what a lot of trouble they've caused. I can't find CHOICE.EXE in WINXP, and there's no choice.com either, which makes writing BATCH very headache-inducing for me.
Also, just now I found out that EDLIN, which was popular in DOS3 but disappeared after DOS6, has made a comeback in XP, only now it's changed from COM to EXE. Why go through all that?
So that's how it is. I know very little about WINNT. That CHOICE.EXE is probably a 32-bit version.
After all that talk, it all comes down to blaming MS, what a lot of trouble they've caused. I can't find CHOICE.EXE in WINXP, and there's no choice.com either, which makes writing BATCH very headache-inducing for me.
Also, just now I found out that EDLIN, which was popular in DOS3 but disappeared after DOS6, has made a comeback in XP, only now it's changed from COM to EXE. Why go through all that?
※ Batchinger 致 Bat Fans：请访问 批处理编程的异类 ，欢迎交流与共享批处理编程心得！
Floor 10
Posted 2004-02-11 00:00 · 中国 山西 太原 联通
中级用户
★
Credits 206
Posts 22
Joined 2004-02-05 00:00
22-year member
UID 16772
Gender Male
Posts 22
Joined 2004-02-05 00:00
22-year member
UID 16772
Gender Male
Status Offline
Re: willsort
Exactly, Microsoft doesn't know what it's up to. Maybe it found something still useful, so it brought it back and renamed it to pass off.
But that CHOICE.EXE. It supports Chinese display in WIN2003 SERVER. But it can't be used in system versions lower than XP. What a big flaw or loss.
Exactly, Microsoft doesn't know what it's up to. Maybe it found something still useful, so it brought it back and renamed it to pass off.
But that CHOICE.EXE. It supports Chinese display in WIN2003 SERVER. But it can't be used in system versions lower than XP. What a big flaw or loss.
Floor 11
Posted 2004-06-24 00:00 · 中国 广东 广州 联通
中级用户
★★
Credits 378
Posts 88
Joined 2004-05-05 00:00
22-year member
UID 23815
Gender Male
Posts 88
Joined 2004-05-05 00:00
22-year member
UID 23815
Gender Male
Status Offline
I'm looking for it too!
www.51ct.net
Floor 12
Posted 2004-06-25 00:00 · 中国 河北 石家庄 联通
铂金会员
★★★★
网络独行侠
Credits 6,962
Posts 2,753
Joined 2003-04-16 00:00
23-year member
UID 1565
Gender Male
From 河北保定
Posts 2,753
Joined 2003-04-16 00:00
23-year member
UID 1565
Gender Male
From 河北保定
Status Offline
Compatibility issues with different versions of software have always been an inherent problem with M$ systems. Not to mention that commands under 2000 can't be used under DOS 7.1. Have you ever tried using DOS programs of different versions with each other? For example, have you tried using the command.com of DOS 7.1 under 6.22? It simply doesn't work. Even third-party developed programs have similar compatibility issues, so the higher version of DOS has a setver.exe.
But I guess this problem probably exists in UNIX as well. When the system is upgraded, many library files that software depends on also change, and of course, the commands that depend on a certain library can't run either.
But I guess this problem probably exists in UNIX as well. When the system is upgraded, many library files that software depends on also change, and of course, the commands that depend on a certain library can't run either.
Forum Jump: