X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-SWARE-Spam-Status:	No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00
X-Spam-Check-By:	sourceware.org
Message-ID:	<847981.91314.qm@web88305.mail.re4.yahoo.com>
X-RocketYMMF:	ilatypov
Date:	Tue, 16 Mar 2010 09:15:23 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Ilguiz Latypov <ilatypov AT infradead DOT org>
Subject:	Re: allow executing a path in backslash notation
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
MIME-Version:	1.0
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id:	<cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/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

> I checked this situation in cmd.exe, and it is not capable of using
> paths relativ to %Path%.  In other words, if %Path% contains a path
> c:\foo and you have two files C:\foo\baz.exe and C:\foo\bar\baz.exe,
> then calling "baz" works, but calling "bar\baz" fails.

I only meant resolving relative commands against the current directory.  That is, regardless of %PATH%, bar\baz is allowed to resolve if the current directory is c:\foo.  

The absolute paths are already resolved.

My patch allows relative and absolute commands in backslash notation, as the test case shows.

> So, yes, maybe we should care for this situation but it's not something
> to worry about a lot.  I'll look into it again at some point after 1.7.2
> has been released.

Thanks.

-- 

--
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 -