Executables for "grep" package installed inconsistently

[Max Bowsher]

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
Windows-ism.

> 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
> possibility.)

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.



Max.


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/