This is the mail archive of the cygwin 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: UNC and POSIX paths

On 06/17/2013 08:12 AM, wrote:
Why not simply fix the "not very well written configure scripts and
makefiles"instead? BTW I've never come across a single one of those.
Where are you getting yours?
Can't answer this offhand (aware you didn't ask me :P) but, under the
misguidance of PM's like Gentoo(portage) and rpm(build), when combined with
poorly and/or belligerently written packaging scripts, this can happen
incessantly.  But that mostly only comes up when building Frankencygwins.
Sometimes you can fix it by forcing something like --prefix=///usr/local.
I'm trying to understand the reluctance towards "fixing the problem" and instead the insistence on "putting a band aid on it". So in the above, why would you not instead do --prefix=/usr/local?
A CYGWIN env flag to disable UNC paths, or graft them somewhere other than
//, or an fstab-hack--basically anything allowing one to turn this feature
off--would be a moderate blessing for a small number (greater than or equal
to one) of people, but SHTDI, and this is endlessly proposed and

At least one "merit-based" argument does recommend against implementing this
-- a great many configure scripts test for whether // == /, which means
packages could break if packagers happened to build while using the proposed
anti-feature-feature (the inevitable response being, "shouldn't those
packages just fix their broken configure scripts"? :P)
Yes, indeed. See above.
Andrew DeFaria <>
If a mute swears does his mother wash his hands with soap?

Problem reports:
Unsubscribe info:

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