X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-SWARE-Spam-Status:	No, hits=0.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_20,FREEMAIL_FROM,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_NO,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD
X-Spam-Check-By:	sourceware.org
From:	"Andy Hall" <fixpertise-consulting AT comcast DOT net>
To:	<cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
References:	<BLU152-W148807FCA9B75410CB8F1FCED10 AT phx DOT gbl> <92B65842B4224F3FA65CE40F3608F7DF AT multiplay DOT co DOT uk> <20120712010353 DOT GB14112 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <447894CEE2E7427F8E0AFC5A206BAD92 AT multiplay DOT co DOT uk> <981681190 DOT 20120712160313 AT mtu-net DOT ru> <4FFED62A DOT 7060106 AT cygwin DOT com>
Subject:	RE: tar won't extract all files when a file with exe extension precedes the same without extension inside the archive
Date:	Thu, 12 Jul 2012 09:26:31 -0700
Message-ID:	<EEF3431C30314B69B826B954F2D49B64@ahallpc>
MIME-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<4FFED62A.7060106@cygwin.com>
X-IsSubscribed:	yes
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id:	<cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Unsubscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT 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

> On 7/12/2012 8:03 AM, Andrey Repin wrote:
> > Greetings, Steven Hartland!
> >
> >>> There really is not much point in rehashing this again under a
> different
> >>> subject.
> >>>
> >>> If you or anyone would like to offer patches which change the behavior
> > <emphasis>
> >>> while keeping everyone happy about .exe handling
> > </emphasis>
> >>> please do so.
> >
> >> Isn't the commit which changed the behaviour stored so where,
> >> as this has worked fine in the past, so in theory it could be
> >> just applied in reverse?
> >
> > Reading comprehension is the skill you should train. Really.
> 
> Indeed Steven.  Please review all the comments from this thread and
> the history of this change.  While you view this as a bug, others
> view it as a feature.  This is one area where Cygwin has to try to
> straddle the Windows and Linux worlds and there is no completely
> painless solution.  There are multiple workarounds that have already
> been presented to you if this new behavior doesn't suit your needs.
> Or you can "wow" us all with your abilities to find a comprehensive
> solution that no one has found before.
> 
> --
> Larry
> 

At the risk of adding more fuel to the fire, let me add my 2 cents worth to
this.

1.  As a long time and frequent user of tar and rsync to transfer files and
directories between Windows and various UNIX flavors, I have been astonished
(and severely burned) by the fact that transferring  files back and forth
between Windows and other UNIX machines via tar, rsync, cp -r or other
similar mechanisms are not idempotent operations, at least with respect to
file names and contents.  This violates the "principle of least
astonishment" not to mention that it breaks things in not so obvious and
surprising ways when it happens.  

2.  Since this is a "Windows thing", is there some reason why the execution
of "file" or "file.exe" isn't handled as a special case in the exec call
(and all its flavors) and no place else?  For example, it would seem that if
exec is asked to run "file" with no .exe extension and that file  does not
exist or is not executable, then it could try "file.exe" if that exists and
is executable.  

Andy Hall



--
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 -