This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
SV: Tracing down problem when compiling GCC 3.3 under cygwin PR 10626
- From: Øyvind Harboe <oyvind dot harboe at zylin dot com>
- To: <cygwin at cygwin dot com>,<cgf-rcm at cygwin dot com>
- Date: Wed, 7 May 2003 08:46:26 +0200
- Subject: SV: Tracing down problem when compiling GCC 3.3 under cygwin PR 10626
>AFAICT, install-sh should never be asked to install an executable which
>lacks an .exe when the executable was built with a .exe extension. So,
>the fact that sometimes it "works" is a red herring.
I don't understand what you mean when you say that it is a "red herring".
Here is what I observed:
- The install of gcc fails most of the time under cygwin on the machine
at work. (This is for sure)
- I have traced it down to install-sh (I could be wrong here)
- When I launch Emacs and create a shell from within emacs and run
"make install", the install is more likely, but not guaranteed to work.
(I'm quite confident about this observation).
- I haven't had the oportunity to check if this problem is particular to
> As you noted, cp
>has limited support for copying .exe files and mv has none. It really
>is up to gcc to accommodate that by specifying the .exe extension in all
>cases. That's the whole point of having an install-sh script. It's
>supposed to be accommodating of system pecularities.
I have also seen that "ls foo" will list foo.exe. I believe that
install-sh checks for the existance of "foo" (the source) and
then believes that "foo" can be used in cp/mv, etc.
I will convey the message, but from the response I got, I don't
think the guy who was assigned to the problem had enough knowledge
about CygWin to resolve the issue.
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html