Suggestion for run (with patch)

Christopher Faylor
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
>paths instead.

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:
Problem reports:

More information about the Cygwin mailing list