This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: Executables for "grep" package installed inconsistently
- From: "Max Bowsher" <maxb at ukf dot net>
- To: <martin at xemacs dot org>,<cygwin at cygwin dot com>
- Date: Sun, 18 May 2003 23:31:58 +0100
- Subject: Re: Executables for "grep" package installed inconsistently
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org.HOWL>
Martin Buchholz wrote:
> I work on software that wants to be buildable by Cygwin. It looks for
> a /bin/egrep.exe, but can't find it.
Then fix your software to look for /bin/egrep. If you are using a
POSIX-compatibility toolkit, you shouldn't be surprised when is hides a
> Of course the system
> administrator can easily add a symlink
> /usr/bin/egrep.exe -> grep.exe
> (It is possible that this won't work because egrep is one of those
> evil programs that looks at $0... I haven't investigated that
Making a suggestion and then pointing out that it may have a flaw is NOT a
good way to get it accepted.
> $ bunzip2 < grep-2.5-1.tar.bz2 | tar tvf - | grep usr/bin
> drwxrwxrwx cgf/group 0 2002-03-20 21:16:15 usr/bin/
> lrwxrwxrwx cgf/group 0 2002-03-20 21:16:15 usr/bin/egrep -> grep
> lrwxrwxrwx cgf/group 0 2002-03-20 21:16:15 usr/bin/fgrep -> grep
> -rwxrwxrwx cgf/group 85504 2002-03-20 21:16:15 usr/bin/grep.exe
> If grep is installed as "grep.exe", then egrep should be installed as
> "egrep.exe". Ditto for fgrep.
No, not really. Cygwin does a good job at hiding .exe stuff for the most
part. Not perfect, but good.
I see no reason to artificially add .exe mess back in.
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html