This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: How to (dynamically) control Unix/Dos PATH-like variable tran slation
- To: "Jan Vicherek" <cygwin-user at ied dot com>,<cygwin at cygwin dot com>
- Subject: Re: How to (dynamically) control Unix/Dos PATH-like variable tran slation
- From: "Robert Collins" <robert dot collins at itdomain dot com dot au>
- Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2001 11:38:47 +1000
- References: <Pine.LNX.email@example.com>
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jan Vicherek" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2001 11:24 AM
Subject: Re: How to (dynamically) control Unix/Dos PATH-like variable
> Hi Chris,
> On Tue, 3 Apr 2001, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 03, 2001 at 06:06:24PM -0400, Jan Vicherek wrote:
> > > Would anybody have a suggestion for better solution than
> > >ENVVARs and cmd line args ?
> > If you are using Cygwin programs, then set the environment variables
> > using UNIX paths.
> > If you are using non-Cygwin programs, then use Windows paths in the
> > environment variables.
> Environment variable A contains some path(s).
> I'm using non-Cygwin programs, which set variable A, then they call
> Cygwin programs (for process control, makefiles and bash scripts, etc,
> building stuff). These Cygwin programs use and set variable A, and
> turn call non-Cygwin programs, which again use the variable A.
> I'm failing to see how the ENVVAR/cmd_args translation on demand
> cause more problems than it solves.
Chris _IS NOT_ saying it'll cause more problems. He's saying "My
paid work day doesn't really allow time for programming" and "this
particular thing is really low priority for the volunteer work I do on
It's a low priority because, out of a user base of thousands (Chris , do
you have any rough count? ),
only 1 user has reported this as a nice thing to have - you.
That means that if the volunteer programmers prioritise their work by
a) interest (gee I'd like that) and
b) benefit to the community (everyone wants x) and
c) effort (last item, but can be the decider)
Your particular suggestion comes out very low
a) none of the volunteers has any need for it - so no direct interest
b) only one end user eants it
c) effort may be minimal, but it's not even in the running.
The options you have are
1) write it yourself. Cygwin's source is pretty clear, and the dev team
will give hints. (And "write a test case on occasion:])
2) put it on the wishlist at
In case this seems harsh, it's exactly the process that got Linux, the
opensource *BSD's , most of the GNU software, apache etc where they are
> It only makes sense to use the same variable in both. See above.
> Translating them maually every time control is about to be handed over
> Win/Cygwin boundary is cumbersome, sometimes even impossible. Using
> different variables may be another cumbersome solution, but again
> them in sync has to be done manually, which is almost the same level
Fine. The technical angle isn't the issue (it hasn't been for about 5
emails). If you want the direct solution to your problem, write it. If
you want a workaround put cygpath in a intermediary script to alter the
variable as you go windows to cygwin anbd back again.
<skip detail example>
> Do these scenarios seem unreasonable ? Am I missing something ?
Yes. A patch to implement your suggestion. You've obviously thought it
out quite well... surely it's easy enough to code with level of thought
you've put into it.
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple