I'd like to restart this old thread
<http://www.winehq.com/hypermail/wine-users/2005/05/index.html#165>
which brings up the point that there are applications that hard-code
cmd.exe and (sometimes intentionally) ignore COMSPEC.
One example is Perl, which has the following comment in win32/win32.c:
/* we don't use COMSPEC here for two reasons:
* 1. the same reason perl on UNIX doesn't use SHELL--rampant and
* uncontrolled unportability of the ensuing scripts.
* 2. PERL5SHELL could be set to a shell that may not be fit for
* interactive use (which is what most programs look in COMSPEC
* for).
*/
I'm currently looking into what would be required for something like a
symlink to wcmd.exe, but at the same time I'm wondering the historical
reasons for choosing 'wcmd' and if it should be changed to just 'cmd'.
Thomas Kho