Mail Archives: cygwin/2009/11/05/13:31:55
On Thu, Nov 05, 2009 at 07:22:25PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>On Nov 5 13:17, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 05, 2009 at 01:08:47PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> >On Thu, Nov 05, 2009 at 06:34:50PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>> >>Let's see:
>> >>
>> >> rename ("foo.exe", "perl5.10.0.exe") result: perl5.10.0.exe
>> >> rename ("foo.exe", "perl5.10.0") result: perl5.10.0
>> >> rename ("foo", "perl5.10.0.exe") result: perl5.10.0.exe
>> >> rename ("foo", "perl5.10.0") result: perl5.10.0
>> >>
>> >>The latter one is a problem, because that's what happens when calling
>> >>
>> >> strip perl5.10.0
>> >>
>> >>so after strip the binary is missing a .exe suffix.
>> >>
>> >>Sigh.
>> >>
>> >>Is there any *reliable* solution to this problem, other than never to
>> >>add a .exe suffix?
>> >
>> >Isn't the reliable-but-slow method to check the magic at the beginning
>> >of the file to see if it actually is a .exe? I'm not sure we want to do
>> >that though.
>>
>> Which is, of course, what we're doing. Duh.
>>
>> I see why the strip case is problematic but I can't think of a way to
>> fix it since the "state" of the temporary file is lost between stripping
>> and renaming.
>
>Right. That's why I thought that any suffix given in the target file
>name should be sufficient to avoid appending the .exe suffix, but
>apparently it isn't. Probably we would need to check for any kind
>of Windows executable suffix like .exe, .sys, .com. I have to admit,
>though, that I never saw a .src suffix for a Windows binary...
Well, in this case we could just look for alphabetic suffixes. But that's
probably too kludgy.
cgf
--
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
- Raw text -