🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <2295@mtgzz.UUCP> rosen@mtgzz.UUCP writes:
>> The ordinary way to do this is to pass the name of the batch file as a 
>> parameter to COMMAND.COM. Also, COMMAND.COM must be invoked with the /C 
>> option so that it will go away after the batch file terminates.
> [...]
>
>Why do you need to invoke COMMAND at all. In my
>experience you can just enter the second .BAT file as an ordinary
>commmand ???

You don't as long as you don't mind not being able to return to the calling
batch file. Invoking a batch file directly from within a batch file will 
cause control to be passed (just like you want) but as soon as the second
batch file terminates, you get dropped back into DOS.

The original poster wanted to invoke the second batch file as sort of a sub-
routine to the first, with the ability to return control to the calling batch 
file after the called batch file terminated. As far as I know, the only way 
to do this is by invoking a second command processor with the name of the 
called batch file passed as an argument. The /C option tells COMMAND.COM
to "terminate and don't stay resident" after the called batch file executes.

                                               Jim Greenlee


-- 
The Shadow...!{akgua,allegra,amd,hplabs,ihnp4,seismo,ut-ngp}!gatech!gitpyr!jkg

Jryy, abj lbh'ir tbar naq qbar vg! Whfg unq gb xrrc svqqyvat jvgu vg hagvy lbh
oebxr vg, qvqa'g lbh?!