Mail Archives: cygwin/2007/05/01/10:01:05
Christopher Faylor wrote:
> Before you do this, I have a question. Why is this important now when you've
> apparently been doing this for many years? This isn't the only package which
> makes symlinks to executables. And, since, AFAIK, setup.exe doesn't understand
> hard links it means that you really do have to make a copy. If you make a copy
> you stand the chance of having python.exe out of sync with the thing that it is
> supposed to be pointing to.
>
> If it was a general Cygwin policy to always make copies, I could see changing
> Python. But, again, since it isn't, I don't see why python should be unique.
Because python is a command interpreter, and therefore likely to be
invoked directly from the windows environment -- unlike, say, egrep.
Similarly, sh.exe is a copy of bash.exe (and used to be a copy of
ash.exe) -- and not a symlink.
I think this copy (or hardlink) should be performed by a postinstall
script -- again, just like sh.exe is updated by bash packages.
--
Chuck
--
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 -