Mail Archives: cygwin/2003/11/12/23:41:14
I recently installed a fresh version of Cygwin on a machine and had my
build system fail, due to the previously discussed issue with cp and
.exe files. In a nutshell, "touch foo.exe; cp foo bar" fails. See:
http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2003-10/msg00989.html
http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2003-09/msg01196.html
I tracked it down to the removal of a block of code between
fileutils-4.1-1 and fileutils-4.1.2:
--- fileutils-4.1-1/./src/copy.c 2001-06-15 15:20:08.000000000 -0400
+++ fileutils-4.1-2/./src/copy.c 2001-06-25 18:42:46.000000000 -0400
@@ -197,25 +197,6 @@
source_desc = open (src_path, O_RDONLY);
if (source_desc < 0)
{
-#ifdef __CYGWIN__
- char *p;
- if ((p = strchr (src_path, '\0') - 4) <= src_path || strcasecmp (p, ".exe") != 0)
- {
- p = alloca (strlen (src_path) + 5);
- src_path = strcat (strcpy (p, src_path), ".exe");
- source_desc = open (src_path, O_RDONLY);
- if (source_desc >= 0)
- {
- if ((p = strchr (dst_path, '\0') - 4) <= dst_path ||
- (p[-1] != '.' && strcasecmp (p, ".exe") != 0 ))
- {
- p = alloca (strlen (dst_path) + 5);
- dst_path = strcat (strcpy (p, dst_path), ".exe");
- }
- goto ok;
- }
- }
-#endif /*__CYGWIN__*/
/* If SRC_PATH doesn't exist, then chances are good that the
user did something like this `cp --backup foo foo': and foo
existed to start with, but copy_internal renamed DST_PATH
@@ -229,9 +210,6 @@
return -1;
}
-#ifdef __CYGWIN__
- ok:
-#endif
/* These semantics are required for cp.
The if-block will be taken in move_mode. */
if (*new_dst)
@@ -1163,16 +1141,6 @@
{
if (chmod (dst_path, get_dest_mode (x, src_mode)))
{
-#ifdef __CYGWIN__
- char *p;
- if ((p = strchr (dst_path, '\0') - 4) <= src_path || strcasecmp (p, ".exe") != 0)
- {
- p = alloca (strlen (dst_path) + 5);
- (void) strcat (strcpy (p, src_path), ".exe");
- if (chmod (p, src_mode & x->umask_kill) == 0)
- goto ok;
- }
-#endif /*__CYGWIN__*/
error (0, errno, _("setting permissions for %s"), quote (dst_path));
if (x->set_mode || x->require_preserve)
return 1;
This code was added in 4.1-1 in the first place, with the rationale
that it's good for make(1) rules. I found this to be true. I've
searched for a comment or rationale for removing this, but I haven't
found a Cygwin-specific ChangeLog for fileutils, nor CVS for it, nor
even an announcement of 4.1-2 (did it ride in with Cygwin 1.5.0-1 or
1.5.1-1?).
Was this an intentional change? If so, what was the intent? The
previous behavior is very useful.
- Nathan
--
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/
- Raw text -