Mail Archives: cygwin/2006/08/17/10:46:50
On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 03:16:31PM +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
>On 17 August 2006 15:13, Igor Peshansky wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 17 Aug 2006, Igor Peshansky wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 17 Aug 2006, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>>>
>>>>> On Wed, 16 Aug 2006, Igor Peshansky wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Alternatively, you can try to implement a $(cygpath ...) function in
>>>>> make and submit *that* to the upstream maintainers.
>>>>
>>>> FWIW, I don't think such a function is a good idea, and if it is
>>>> proposed on the Make mailing list, I will probably object to it.
>>>>
>>>> The reason is that adding such a function goes against portability of
>>>> Makefiles across different ports of Make,
>>>
>>> ...which you would already have with cl commands and DOS paths...
>>
>> Actually, sorry, I've misread the above. Doesn't GNU make already have a
>> plethora of functions not present in other makes? What's wrong with one
>> more? If "cygpath" is too system-specific a name, let's pick one that
>> isn't ("pathconv"?).
>
>
> And I was going to point out that it could simply be a no-op on any other
>platform and, as you say, a dll call on cygwin that hides make from being
>exposed to any 'black magic'.
I don't know. I think I agree with Eli here.
The thought of adding a cygwin-specific function to make and then making sure
that it exists as a noop in any other version of make seems a little pushy to
me.
cgf
--
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 -