X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-SWARE-Spam-Status:	No, hits=-6.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD
X-Spam-Check-By:	sourceware.org
Message-ID:	<4C292D35.6000005@redhat.com>
Date:	Mon, 28 Jun 2010 17:16:05 -0600
From:	Eric Blake <eblake AT redhat DOT com>
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.10) Gecko/20100621 Fedora/3.0.5-1.fc13 Lightning/1.0b2pre Mnenhy/0.8.2 Thunderbird/3.0.5
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: Regression in .exe extension handling
References:	<1277766496 DOT 7412 DOT 18 DOT camel AT YAAKOV04>
In-Reply-To:	<1277766496.7412.18.camel@YAAKOV04>
X-IsSubscribed:	yes
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

--------------enig269356398B53F128DBB00092
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 06/28/2010 05:08 PM, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
> It is not unusual for mono packages to create a wrapper script (to be
> installed in PATH) in the same directory as an assembly (which has .exe
> suffix and is installed out of PATH), which uncovered a regression using
> the 20100622 snapshot:
>=20
> echo script > foo
> echo executable > foo.exe
> mkdir bar
> install foo bar/foo

The problem is here - should install be open()ing "foo" (the script) or
"foo.exe" (the executable) as the source file for copying into bar/foo?
 Since it is never a good idea to have both an .exe and a script of the
same name in the same directory, is this really a regression, or just
bad behavior on mono's part?  Remember, libtool was recently changed to
avoid exactly this ambiguity.  Or should I be trying to patch coreutils
(and/or someone patch cygwin1.dll) to try harder to open the script
instead of the .exe when the suffix-less file conflicts with the .exe?

--=20
Eric Blake   eblake AT redhat DOT com    +1-801-349-2682
Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org


--------------enig269356398B53F128DBB00092
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Public key at http://people.redhat.com/eblake/eblake.gpg
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJMKS01AAoJEKeha0olJ0NqleEIAIYHP1YVdtl+/AZyAmheuJor
H9mGPzY6Qkw7GGmHwrdKoWc9ryvXTNZZTrhbR5UNxErCXUqobz5d8S7ueNqZnkRK
WwccWlt/lWvQkHbFdgFMqZdqz97MnmqYoJYO/PXRgJj7s5+qvQWqS72ihQ3yTh5x
YNL547YuSpvrzFET5878rrGZZf/5rdbqhSVynXw9PhJ8eFV02xx5wD7jPFLV2MSe
1PPgp3Z8xGrhY2tJl30UT3tVwhUDni0iyiuBGtXODujJDEqyNSS4aNetQu4inGvk
MgR2pRe1HGQffmR63Hhit8R5TBQ8nQQF4OsjllWY9bUBnNVkpp6Nkr1Yr4qJ6Lk=
=jXHe
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--------------enig269356398B53F128DBB00092--

- Raw text -