|
»
»
Re: src/winsup/cygwin ChangeLog syscalls.cc
|
View:
New views
20 Messages
—
Rating Filter:
Alert me
|
| < Prev | 1 - 2 | Next > |
 |
|
|
|
Re: src/winsup/cygwin ChangeLog syscalls.cc
by Corinna Vinschen-2
::
Rate this Message:
On Nov 5 11:14, Yaakov S wrote:
> On 05/11/2009 08:44, corinna-rDBXBDvO6BXQT0dZR+AlfA@... wrote: > >Modified files: > > winsup/cygwin : ChangeLog syscalls.cc > > > >Log message: > > * syscalls.cc (nt_path_has_suffix): New function. > > (rename): Don't append .exe suffix if binary target name has any suffix > > at all. > > > >Patches: > >http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/winsup/cygwin/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.4708&r2=1.4709 > >http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/winsup/cygwin/syscalls.cc.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.543&r2=1.544 > > On my system dozens of executables do have a '.' near the end of > their names, either representing a version (e.g. perl5.10.0.exe, > python2.5.exe), or OCaml native code (*.opt.exe), or for other > reasons (e.g. *.bin.exe where the program is launched via a script). > How does this change affect building/installing them? Let's see: rename ("foo.exe", "perl5.10.0.exe") result: perl5.10.0.exe rename ("foo.exe", "perl5.10.0") result: perl5.10.0 rename ("foo", "perl5.10.0.exe") result: perl5.10.0.exe rename ("foo", "perl5.10.0") result: perl5.10.0 The latter one is a problem, because that's what happens when calling strip perl5.10.0 so after strip the binary is missing a .exe suffix. Sigh. Is there any *reliable* solution to this problem, other than never to add a .exe suffix? Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple |
|
|
Re: src/winsup/cygwin ChangeLog syscalls.cc
by Yaakov (Cygwin/X)
::
Rate this Message:
On 05/11/2009 11:34, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> Sigh. > > Is there any *reliable* solution to this problem, other than never to > add a .exe suffix? What is "this problem" that you're trying to fix? Yaakov -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple |
|
|
Re: src/winsup/cygwin ChangeLog syscalls.cc
by Christopher Faylor-8
::
Rate this Message:
On Thu, Nov 05, 2009 at 06:34:50PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>On Nov 5 11:14, Yaakov S wrote: >> On 05/11/2009 08:44, corinna-rDBXBDvO6BXQT0dZR+AlfA@... wrote: >> >Modified files: >> > winsup/cygwin : ChangeLog syscalls.cc >> > >> >Log message: >> > * syscalls.cc (nt_path_has_suffix): New function. >> > (rename): Don't append .exe suffix if binary target name has any suffix >> > at all. >> > >> >Patches: >> >http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/winsup/cygwin/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.4708&r2=1.4709 >> >http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/winsup/cygwin/syscalls.cc.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.543&r2=1.544 >> >> On my system dozens of executables do have a '.' near the end of >> their names, either representing a version (e.g. perl5.10.0.exe, >> python2.5.exe), or OCaml native code (*.opt.exe), or for other >> reasons (e.g. *.bin.exe where the program is launched via a script). >> How does this change affect building/installing them? > >Let's see: > > rename ("foo.exe", "perl5.10.0.exe") result: perl5.10.0.exe > rename ("foo.exe", "perl5.10.0") result: perl5.10.0 > rename ("foo", "perl5.10.0.exe") result: perl5.10.0.exe > rename ("foo", "perl5.10.0") result: perl5.10.0 > >The latter one is a problem, because that's what happens when calling > > strip perl5.10.0 > >so after strip the binary is missing a .exe suffix. > >Sigh. > >Is there any *reliable* solution to this problem, other than never to >add a .exe suffix? Isn't the reliable-but-slow method to check the magic at the beginning of the file to see if it actually is a .exe? I'm not sure we want to do that though. cgf -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple |
|
|
Re: src/winsup/cygwin ChangeLog syscalls.cc
by Corinna Vinschen-2
::
Rate this Message:
On Nov 5 11:55, Yaakov S wrote:
> On 05/11/2009 11:34, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > >Sigh. > > > >Is there any *reliable* solution to this problem, other than never to > >add a .exe suffix? > > What is "this problem" that you're trying to fix? rename ("foo", "bar"), when "foo" is a Windows binary. That's what happens, for instance, when you call strip foo strip create a tempfile with an arbitrary name to write the stripped binary to, and then renames it back to the incoming filename. So the current mechanism will find that "tmpXYZ" is a Windows binary file, the .exe suffix was not given in the source, and no suffix (in the previous incarnation "no .exe suffix") has been specified for the target, so it appends .exe to the target filename. The old implementation results in another problem, see http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2009-11/msg00106.html Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple |
|
|
Re: src/winsup/cygwin ChangeLog syscalls.cc
by Christopher Faylor-8
::
Rate this Message:
On Thu, Nov 05, 2009 at 01:08:47PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>On Thu, Nov 05, 2009 at 06:34:50PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >>On Nov 5 11:14, Yaakov S wrote: >>> On 05/11/2009 08:44, corinna-rDBXBDvO6BXQT0dZR+AlfA@... wrote: >>> >Modified files: >>> > winsup/cygwin : ChangeLog syscalls.cc >>> > >>> >Log message: >>> > * syscalls.cc (nt_path_has_suffix): New function. >>> > (rename): Don't append .exe suffix if binary target name has any suffix >>> > at all. >>> > >>> >Patches: >>> >http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/winsup/cygwin/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.4708&r2=1.4709 >>> >http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/winsup/cygwin/syscalls.cc.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.543&r2=1.544 >>> >>> On my system dozens of executables do have a '.' near the end of >>> their names, either representing a version (e.g. perl5.10.0.exe, >>> python2.5.exe), or OCaml native code (*.opt.exe), or for other >>> reasons (e.g. *.bin.exe where the program is launched via a script). >>> How does this change affect building/installing them? >> >>Let's see: >> >> rename ("foo.exe", "perl5.10.0.exe") result: perl5.10.0.exe >> rename ("foo.exe", "perl5.10.0") result: perl5.10.0 >> rename ("foo", "perl5.10.0.exe") result: perl5.10.0.exe >> rename ("foo", "perl5.10.0") result: perl5.10.0 >> >>The latter one is a problem, because that's what happens when calling >> >> strip perl5.10.0 >> >>so after strip the binary is missing a .exe suffix. >> >>Sigh. >> >>Is there any *reliable* solution to this problem, other than never to >>add a .exe suffix? > >Isn't the reliable-but-slow method to check the magic at the beginning >of the file to see if it actually is a .exe? I'm not sure we want to do >that though. Which is, of course, what we're doing. Duh. I see why the strip case is problematic but I can't think of a way to fix it since the "state" of the temporary file is lost between stripping and renaming. cgf -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple |
|
|
Re: src/winsup/cygwin ChangeLog syscalls.cc
by Corinna Vinschen-2
::
Rate this Message:
On Nov 5 13:08, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 05, 2009 at 06:34:50PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > >Let's see: > > > > rename ("foo.exe", "perl5.10.0.exe") result: perl5.10.0.exe > > rename ("foo.exe", "perl5.10.0") result: perl5.10.0 > > rename ("foo", "perl5.10.0.exe") result: perl5.10.0.exe > > rename ("foo", "perl5.10.0") result: perl5.10.0 > > > >The latter one is a problem, because that's what happens when calling > > > > strip perl5.10.0 > > > >so after strip the binary is missing a .exe suffix. > > > >Sigh. > > > >Is there any *reliable* solution to this problem, other than never to > >add a .exe suffix? > > Isn't the reliable-but-slow method to check the magic at the beginning > of the file to see if it actually is a .exe? I'm not sure we want to do > that though. That's what already is done by calling GetBinaryTypeW on the source file. The problem is that the desired target name could actually be "foo.sys" or "flub.com", as outlined in http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2009-11/msg00106.html Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple |
|
|
Re: src/winsup/cygwin ChangeLog syscalls.cc
by Corinna Vinschen-2
::
Rate this Message:
On Nov 5 13:17, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 05, 2009 at 01:08:47PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote: > >On Thu, Nov 05, 2009 at 06:34:50PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > >>Let's see: > >> > >> rename ("foo.exe", "perl5.10.0.exe") result: perl5.10.0.exe > >> rename ("foo.exe", "perl5.10.0") result: perl5.10.0 > >> rename ("foo", "perl5.10.0.exe") result: perl5.10.0.exe > >> rename ("foo", "perl5.10.0") result: perl5.10.0 > >> > >>The latter one is a problem, because that's what happens when calling > >> > >> strip perl5.10.0 > >> > >>so after strip the binary is missing a .exe suffix. > >> > >>Sigh. > >> > >>Is there any *reliable* solution to this problem, other than never to > >>add a .exe suffix? > > > >Isn't the reliable-but-slow method to check the magic at the beginning > >of the file to see if it actually is a .exe? I'm not sure we want to do > >that though. > > Which is, of course, what we're doing. Duh. > > I see why the strip case is problematic but I can't think of a way to > fix it since the "state" of the temporary file is lost between stripping > and renaming. Right. That's why I thought that any suffix given in the target file name should be sufficient to avoid appending the .exe suffix, but apparently it isn't. Probably we would need to check for any kind of Windows executable suffix like .exe, .sys, .com. I have to admit, though, that I never saw a .src suffix for a Windows binary... Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple |
|
|
Re: src/winsup/cygwin ChangeLog syscalls.cc
by Christopher Faylor-8
::
Rate this Message:
On Thu, Nov 05, 2009 at 07:22:25PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>On Nov 5 13:17, Christopher Faylor wrote: >> On Thu, Nov 05, 2009 at 01:08:47PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote: >> >On Thu, Nov 05, 2009 at 06:34:50PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >> >>Let's see: >> >> >> >> rename ("foo.exe", "perl5.10.0.exe") result: perl5.10.0.exe >> >> rename ("foo.exe", "perl5.10.0") result: perl5.10.0 >> >> rename ("foo", "perl5.10.0.exe") result: perl5.10.0.exe >> >> rename ("foo", "perl5.10.0") result: perl5.10.0 >> >> >> >>The latter one is a problem, because that's what happens when calling >> >> >> >> strip perl5.10.0 >> >> >> >>so after strip the binary is missing a .exe suffix. >> >> >> >>Sigh. >> >> >> >>Is there any *reliable* solution to this problem, other than never to >> >>add a .exe suffix? >> > >> >Isn't the reliable-but-slow method to check the magic at the beginning >> >of the file to see if it actually is a .exe? I'm not sure we want to do >> >that though. >> >> Which is, of course, what we're doing. Duh. >> >> I see why the strip case is problematic but I can't think of a way to >> fix it since the "state" of the temporary file is lost between stripping >> and renaming. > >Right. That's why I thought that any suffix given in the target file >name should be sufficient to avoid appending the .exe suffix, but >apparently it isn't. Probably we would need to check for any kind >of Windows executable suffix like .exe, .sys, .com. I have to admit, >though, that I never saw a .src suffix for a Windows binary... Well, in this case we could just look for alphabetic suffixes. But that's probably too kludgy. cgf -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple |
|
|
Re: src/winsup/cygwin ChangeLog syscalls.cc
by Dave Korn-6
::
Rate this Message:
Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 05, 2009 at 07:22:25PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >> Probably we would need to check for any kind >> of Windows executable suffix like .exe, .sys, .com. I have to admit, >> though, that I never saw a .src suffix for a Windows binary... > > Well, in this case we could just look for alphabetic suffixes. But that's > probably too kludgy. %PATHEXT% cheers, DaveK -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple |
|
|
Re: src/winsup/cygwin ChangeLog syscalls.cc
by Dave Korn-6
::
Rate this Message:
Dave Korn wrote:
> Christopher Faylor wrote: >> On Thu, Nov 05, 2009 at 07:22:25PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >>> Probably we would need to check for any kind >>> of Windows executable suffix like .exe, .sys, .com. I have to admit, >>> though, that I never saw a .src suffix for a Windows binary... >> Well, in this case we could just look for alphabetic suffixes. But that's >> probably too kludgy. > > %PATHEXT% Ah, but that doesn't have ".sys". Doh. Wonder if there's a more complete list in the registry somewhere. cheers, DaveK -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple |
|
|
Re: src/winsup/cygwin ChangeLog syscalls.cc
by Yaakov (Cygwin/X)
::
Rate this Message:
On 05/11/2009 13:03, Dave Korn wrote:
>> %PATHEXT% > Ah, but that doesn't have ".sys". Doh. And it does have a lot of extensions that are NOT PE/COFF executables (e.g. .bat). > Wonder if there's a more complete list in the registry somewhere. I think the only reliable way will be to detect .sys and friends manually. :-( In the meantime, should this change be reverted? Yaakov -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple |
|
|
Re: src/winsup/cygwin ChangeLog syscalls.cc
by Corinna Vinschen-2
::
Rate this Message:
On Nov 5 13:31, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 05, 2009 at 07:22:25PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > >On Nov 5 13:17, Christopher Faylor wrote: > >> On Thu, Nov 05, 2009 at 01:08:47PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote: > >> >On Thu, Nov 05, 2009 at 06:34:50PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > >> >>Let's see: > >> >> > >> >> rename ("foo.exe", "perl5.10.0.exe") result: perl5.10.0.exe > >> >> rename ("foo.exe", "perl5.10.0") result: perl5.10.0 > >> >> rename ("foo", "perl5.10.0.exe") result: perl5.10.0.exe > >> >> rename ("foo", "perl5.10.0") result: perl5.10.0 > >> >> > >> >>The latter one is a problem, because that's what happens when calling > >> >> > >> >> strip perl5.10.0 > >> >> > >> >>so after strip the binary is missing a .exe suffix. > >> >> > >> >>Sigh. > >> >> > >> >>Is there any *reliable* solution to this problem, other than never to > >> >>add a .exe suffix? > >> > > >> >Isn't the reliable-but-slow method to check the magic at the beginning > >> >of the file to see if it actually is a .exe? I'm not sure we want to do > >> >that though. > >> > >> Which is, of course, what we're doing. Duh. > >> > >> I see why the strip case is problematic but I can't think of a way to > >> fix it since the "state" of the temporary file is lost between stripping > >> and renaming. > > > >Right. That's why I thought that any suffix given in the target file > >name should be sufficient to avoid appending the .exe suffix, but > >apparently it isn't. Probably we would need to check for any kind > >of Windows executable suffix like .exe, .sys, .com. I have to admit, > >though, that I never saw a .src suffix for a Windows binary... > > Well, in this case we could just look for alphabetic suffixes. But that's > probably too kludgy. Worth a try, at least. Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple |
|
|
Re: src/winsup/cygwin ChangeLog syscalls.cc
by Corinna Vinschen-2
::
Rate this Message:
On Nov 5 13:51, Yaakov S wrote:
> On 05/11/2009 13:03, Dave Korn wrote: > >> %PATHEXT% > > Ah, but that doesn't have ".sys". Doh. > > And it does have a lot of extensions that are NOT PE/COFF > executables (e.g. .bat). > > > Wonder if there's a more complete list in the registry somewhere. > > I think the only reliable way will be to detect .sys and friends > manually. :-( > > In the meantime, should this change be reverted? No worries, I won't create a test release with this change. Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple |
|
|
Re: src/winsup/cygwin ChangeLog syscalls.cc
by Corinna Vinschen-2
::
Rate this Message:
On Nov 5 19:03, Dave Korn wrote:
> Dave Korn wrote: > > Christopher Faylor wrote: > >> On Thu, Nov 05, 2009 at 07:22:25PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > >>> Probably we would need to check for any kind > >>> of Windows executable suffix like .exe, .sys, .com. I have to admit, > >>> though, that I never saw a .src suffix for a Windows binary... > >> Well, in this case we could just look for alphabetic suffixes. But that's > >> probably too kludgy. > > > > %PATHEXT% > > > Ah, but that doesn't have ".sys". Doh. > > Wonder if there's a more complete list in the registry somewhere. I just searched the registry for something comprehensive. No luck. Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple |
|
|
Re: src/winsup/cygwin ChangeLog syscalls.cc
by Chris Sutcliffe-2
::
Rate this Message:
>> >Right. That's why I thought that any suffix given in the target file
>> >name should be sufficient to avoid appending the .exe suffix, but >> >apparently it isn't. Probably we would need to check for any kind >> >of Windows executable suffix like .exe, .sys, .com. I have to admit, >> >though, that I never saw a .src suffix for a Windows binary... >> >> Well, in this case we could just look for alphabetic suffixes. But that's >> probably too kludgy. > > Worth a try, at least. What about using the PATHEXT environment variable as a source for possible extensions? Chris -- Chris Sutcliffe http://emergedesktop.org -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple |
|
|
Re: src/winsup/cygwin ChangeLog syscalls.cc
by Christopher Faylor-8
::
Rate this Message:
On Fri, Nov 06, 2009 at 08:51:08AM -0500, Chris Sutcliffe wrote:
>>> >Right. ?That's why I thought that any suffix given in the target file >>> >name should be sufficient to avoid appending the .exe suffix, but >>> >apparently it isn't. ?Probably we would need to check for any kind >>> >of Windows executable suffix like .exe, .sys, .com. ?I have to admit, >>> >though, that I never saw a .src suffix for a Windows binary... >>> >>> Well, in this case we could just look for alphabetic suffixes. ?But that's >>> probably too kludgy. >> >> Worth a try, at least. > >What about using the PATHEXT environment variable as a source for >possible extensions? It was already suggested. It has too much "stuff" in it. I don't like relying on a user-controlled environment variable for this type of thing anyway. cgf -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple |
|
|
Re: src/winsup/cygwin ChangeLog syscalls.cc
by Corinna Vinschen-2
::
Rate this Message:
On Nov 6 09:12, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 06, 2009 at 08:51:08AM -0500, Chris Sutcliffe wrote: > >>> >Right. ?That's why I thought that any suffix given in the target file > >>> >name should be sufficient to avoid appending the .exe suffix, but > >>> >apparently it isn't. ?Probably we would need to check for any kind > >>> >of Windows executable suffix like .exe, .sys, .com. ?I have to admit, > >>> >though, that I never saw a .src suffix for a Windows binary... > >>> > >>> Well, in this case we could just look for alphabetic suffixes. ?But that's > >>> probably too kludgy. > >> > >> Worth a try, at least. > > > >What about using the PATHEXT environment variable as a source for > >possible extensions? > > It was already suggested. It has too much "stuff" in it. > > I don't like relying on a user-controlled environment variable for this > type of thing anyway. ACK. Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple |
|
|
Re: src/winsup/cygwin ChangeLog syscalls.cc
by Christopher Faylor-8
::
Rate this Message:
On Fri, Nov 06, 2009 at 03:27:12PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>On Nov 6 09:12, Christopher Faylor wrote: >> On Fri, Nov 06, 2009 at 08:51:08AM -0500, Chris Sutcliffe wrote: >> >>> >Right. ?That's why I thought that any suffix given in the target file >> >>> >name should be sufficient to avoid appending the .exe suffix, but >> >>> >apparently it isn't. ?Probably we would need to check for any kind >> >>> >of Windows executable suffix like .exe, .sys, .com. ?I have to admit, >> >>> >though, that I never saw a .src suffix for a Windows binary... >> >>> >> >>> Well, in this case we could just look for alphabetic suffixes. ?But that's >> >>> probably too kludgy. >> >> >> >> Worth a try, at least. >> > >> >What about using the PATHEXT environment variable as a source for >> >possible extensions? >> >> It was already suggested. It has too much "stuff" in it. >> >> I don't like relying on a user-controlled environment variable for this >> type of thing anyway. > >ACK. Gesundheit. cgf -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple |
|
|
Re: src/winsup/cygwin ChangeLog syscalls.cc
by Corinna Vinschen-2
::
Rate this Message:
On Nov 6 09:47, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 06, 2009 at 03:27:12PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > >On Nov 6 09:12, Christopher Faylor wrote: > >> On Fri, Nov 06, 2009 at 08:51:08AM -0500, Chris Sutcliffe wrote: > >> >>> >Right. ?That's why I thought that any suffix given in the target file > >> >>> >name should be sufficient to avoid appending the .exe suffix, but > >> >>> >apparently it isn't. ?Probably we would need to check for any kind > >> >>> >of Windows executable suffix like .exe, .sys, .com. ?I have to admit, > >> >>> >though, that I never saw a .src suffix for a Windows binary... > >> >>> > >> >>> Well, in this case we could just look for alphabetic suffixes. ?But that's > >> >>> probably too kludgy. > >> >> > >> >> Worth a try, at least. > >> > > >> >What about using the PATHEXT environment variable as a source for > >> >possible extensions? > >> > >> It was already suggested. It has too much "stuff" in it. > >> > >> I don't like relying on a user-controlled environment variable for this > >> type of thing anyway. > > > >ACK. > > Gesundheit. Danke. Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple |
| < Prev | 1 - 2 | Next > |
| Free embeddable forum powered by Nabble | Forum Help |
