Suggestion for run (with patch)
Tue Apr 10 14:49:00 GMT 2007
On Tue, Apr 10, 2007 at 10:30:20AM -0400, Robert Pendell wrote:
>Adye, TJ (Tim) wrote:
>>Brian Dessent wrote on 09 April 2007 22:05:
>>>If you really want a compromise solution, you could modify run to not
>>>depend on cygwin1.dll at link-time but instead LoadLibrary() it at
>>>runtime, and if that fails fall back to whatever the native version
>>>would have done. Thus you get a single executable that understands
>>>posix paths if the DLL is in the PATH and still allows to you "run
>>>c:\cygwin\bin\bash.exe" (or whatever it is that you're currently doing)
>>>if the DLL is not in the PATH. Though that itself may cause
>>That's a nice idea, but I suspect it would indeed cause more confusion
>>than any gain - especially when we're only talking about a 50k
>>executable. Imagine the program silently behaving differently if you
>>change the PATH. A nice "cygwin1.dll was not found" error message is
>>usually preferable :-)
>>I hope that a separately-named (small) executable, perhaps installed
>>elsewhere, will be acceptable.
>I actually agree with cgf on this one but just an idea here. If that
>kind of function was implemented then a warning could be placed to say
>something to the effect of...
>WARNING: cygwin1.dll was not found in the path. Using native windows
This is one of those cases where whether there is community agreement or
disagreement doesn't really matter. We don't need do discuss alternate
solutions for non-issues.
This isn't going to happen for any number of reasons so can we please
move on now?
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
More information about the Cygwin