pwd vs $PWD, bash, cygwin vs Linux
Peter Farley
pjfarley3@yahoo.com
Wed May 4 15:05:00 GMT 2005
But what if it is *not* your Makefile, but someone
else's, e.g. the many GNU source packages that expect
bash behavior? Surely you don't intend that ordinary
users (well, OK, anyone compiling from a source
package isn't really "ordinary") should modify every
package maintained by GNU in order to make it under
cygwin, do you?
With respect,
Peter
P.S. - If there have already been discussions or if
there already exists documentation on why ash vs. bash
(I gather it is for performance reasons), I'd
appreciate (a) pointer(s) so I could better learn the
history so I don't re-hash settled issues.
--- Christopher Faylor
<cgf-no-personal-reply-please@cygwin.com> wrote:
<Snipped>
> I really don't understand why using CURDIR isn't
> the ultimate solution here. If you can mess with
> your mount table or copy bash to sh, then
> you really should be able to also change your
> Makefile to use $(CURDIR) rather than $$PWD.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
--
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/
More information about the Cygwin
mailing list