tclsh83.exe should be cygtclsh83.exe

[Charles Wilson]

William A. Hoffman wrote:
> I recently ran setup, and one of the new packages, I think gdb, caused
> a tclsh83.exe to be installed into /usr/bin.   It would be nice if
> this were a full working tclsh83.exe, but it is not.    However, it conflicted
> with the working tclsh83.exe I already had in my path.   Shouldn't the
> name of this by cygtclsh83.exe?

No.  Are you suggesting that all 508 of the .exe's in my /bin should 
really be named "cyg*.exe"?  "cyglynx" "cygman" "cygless"  just because 
they MIGHT conflict with a mingw or native version of less.exe or man.exe?

If that is NOT what you are suggestion -- e.g. that only tclsh83 should 
be renamed -- why?  Why is tclsh83 special?

It's easy to avoid executable PATH conflicts -- just make sure the tclsh 
you want appears in the PATH before the one you don't like.  End of problem.

--Chuck

P.S.  Now, we *do* name all DLL's with a special 'cyg' prefix, but that 
is because DLLs are a much more complicated problem than EXEs (memory 
resident, etc etc)


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/