Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Date:	Mon, 3 Jun 2002 14:09:05 -0500
From:	David T-G <davidtg-cygwin AT justpickone DOT org>
To:	"CygWin Users' List" <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Subject:	Re: run batch w/o .bat?
Message-ID:	<20020603190905.GK1231@justpickone.org>
References:	<C69F6A9E1E1F5A488C58B168F0875F4005BD9FF1 AT riv-exch1 DOT echostar DOT com> <5 DOT 1 DOT 0 DOT 14 DOT 0 DOT 20020603144303 DOT 0348bb90 AT pop DOT ma DOT ultranet DOT com>
Mime-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<5.1.0.14.0.20020603144303.0348bb90@pop.ma.ultranet.com>
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.3.99i

--UlsYxwg8UDQn+EKZ
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Larry, et al --

=2E..and then Larry Hall (RFK Partners, Inc) said...
%=20
% At 02:27 PM 6/3/2002, Barnhart, Kevin wrote:
% >
% >I'm a new user to Cygwin, and although I'm sure someone has asked this
% >question before, I'll ask it again (since I sure can't seem to find it in
% >the FAQ or the archives).
%=20
% The email archives is the place to look and look hard for something like=
=20

I did, too, but I didn't find anything that looked familiar -- and yet I
could swear that I had just seen this go by before.

My recollection is that there's a parameter in the cygwin world where you
can add .bat to the extensions list that the shell should automatically
append to an unqualified name so that it knows to run .bat files just
like .exe and .com files.  I haven't found that setting, though.  While
it certainly may not exist, I can hardly believe that I dreamed it or
that I so badly misremembered something else...

Having done quite a search through the archives since the question was
first posted, and having found nothing but your #!.exe idea, which was
*definitely* news to me (and some of the followups intimated that it
might be problematic), I wonder myself if there is a simple way to tell
bash to handle .bat files directly rather than mucking about with a #!
executable...


TIA for me, too, & HAND

:-D
--=20
David T-G                      * It's easier to fight for one's principles
(play) davidtg AT justpickone DOT org * than to live up to them. -- fortune cookie
(work) davidtgwork AT justpickone DOT org
http://www.justpickone.org/davidtg/    Shpx gur Pbzzhavpngvbaf Qrprapl Npg!


--UlsYxwg8UDQn+EKZ
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE8+77QGb7uCXufRwARAkELAKCL+ANcZkbhTRqlgIaKvS4R226bPACgt9ro
oogTr6RE3CuvMudLw4T0jmY=
=h9Go
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--UlsYxwg8UDQn+EKZ--

- Raw text -