Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watnot!watmath!clyde!rutgers!ames!amdahl!bnrmtv!connery
From: connery@bnrmtv.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: Question about CodeView
Message-ID: <1623@bnrmtv.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 13-Apr-87 11:31:37 EST
Article-I.D.: bnrmtv.1623
Posted: Mon Apr 13 11:31:37 1987
Date-Received: Thu, 16-Apr-87 00:28:27 EST
References: <894@water.UUCP>
Distribution: na
Organization: Bell Northern Research, Mtn. View, CA
Lines: 17

> I recently upgraded to the latest verion of MicroSoft's Fortran and
> I'm preplexed by a statement in their README.DOC. It says, and I quote:
> ...
> If this is truly a problem why on earth did Microsoft not call these
> two incantations of CV something like CVC.EXE and CVFORT.EXE to avoid
> any conflict and eliminated the need for the setting of PATH?
> 
> Is this really a problem? Is there a simple work-around?
> 
> THANKS....Paul Calamai.

How about renaming the files to CVC.EXE and CVFOR.EXE?  There's nothing
special about the name--you have to type it in yourself.
-- 

Glenn Connery, Bell Northern Research, Mountain View, CA
{hplabs,amdahl,3comvax}!bnrmtv!connery