This is the mail archive of the cygwin-apps mailing list for the Cygwin project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [ITP] util-linux

Hash: SHA1

According to Yaakov S (Cygwin Ports) on 3/2/2006 3:06 PM:
>>> No.  With Corinna's patch to add CYGWIN=transparent_exe option, we are
>>> asking for problems if we distribute a script alongside an exe.
> OK, but I can think of one *major* "violation" of this: libtool-built
> applications, when linking against a to-be-installed library in the same
> package.  In such a case, the real .exe is placed in .libs, and both an
> extension-less libtool script  and a launcher .exe are placed in the
> builddir; this allows one to run the application w/o installing it.

Yes, I'm aware of that, and I would love to spend some free time trying to
solve another way for libtool to work without relying on the (subtle)
difference between 'foo' and 'foo.exe' when testing uninstalled
libtoolized applications.  This libtool (ab)use of filenames has already
had difficulties with managed mounts and trailing dots.  Then there was
the time when I tried to patch rm in coreutils-5.3.0 to handle .exe
transparently (and immediately had to retract that change because of libtool).

In the meantime, we can just be sure that we don't introduce any more
potential problems between filenames.

- --
Life is short - so eat dessert first!

Eric Blake   
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.1 (Cygwin)
Comment: Public key at
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla -


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]