Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!rutgers!clyde!cuae2!ihnp4!gargoyle!sphinx!cjdb
From: cjdb@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP (Charles Blair)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: DOS 3.2
Message-ID: <856@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 1-Dec-86 11:39:13 EST
Article-I.D.: sphinx.856
Posted: Mon Dec  1 11:39:13 1986
Date-Received: Tue, 2-Dec-86 03:31:44 EST
References: <1157@zen.BERKELEY.EDU>
Reply-To: cjdb@sphinx.UUCP (Charles Blair)
Organization: University of Chicago Library Computer Systems
Lines: 31

In article <1157@zen.BERKELEY.EDU> melvinc@sim.Berkeley.EDU.UUCP (Melvin Chan) writes:
>I'm considering upgrading to DOS version 3.2; can someone tell me
>the major differences between DOS 3.1 and 3.2?  Thanks!
>
>Melvin Chan


One major difference is the XCOPY command, which allows one to copy not
only all the files in the directory, but also all files in
subdirectories below the directory, if the appropriate switch is used.
(Haven't actually tried it, so can't tell you how well it works.)
Another is support for 720k diskettes. 3.2 also has a REPLACE command,
which allows one to replace all files in a target that do not exist in
the source. Again, haven't tried it, but from the documentation I
gather this means that (e.g.) copy *.bat b: will only copy to B: batch
files from source that aren't already on B: (COPY will simply
overwrite). By the way, I'm talking about PC-DOS.

Unless one needed the new floppy support, I'm not sure I would consider
it worthwhile to upgrade, since it's not really buying you much in the
way of new functionality (not like the difference between 3.0 and 3.1,
with the addition of the SUBST command in the latter, for example).
I've also seen these postings about BACKUP/RESTORE bugs, which might be
a serious reason for _not_ upgrading, at least not before verifying the
truth of these reports.



-- 
Charles Blair   			    ..!ihnp4!gargoyle!sphinx!cjdb
The University of Chicago		          PMRCJDB@UCHIMVS1.Bitnet