X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DomainKey-Signature:	a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date
	:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type
	:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=default; b=A/C4J1I+JkrPIiMy
	Hh2ytJio0vxto41PxPUiHVL0dXcSrvAGOClVpmoF4chFHH8WujAQIYFFvnQ0Z3f0
	NtPvFjsYJ2EgKKXEv5sqkIfGsE40CHxOhYssnkeRpXermS6Km3wE47BzBU300rqc
	fw+rs0iGYBfFxAoa4X7Ye4OjZ20=
DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date
	:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type
	:content-transfer-encoding; s=default; bh=pgi/0m1lavROTaOTRYyFNC
	A1aJY=; b=sPfMQtbvHQH1CG25d9dGMsd4aMc0k0BzL8PggPZTBJs/Wqyn9LO5RG
	WVmu9iJrMDSMkLScK8MR4Fx0+U/h6fMxt+uYNLeF3R1xlzMW0C03Pc7LeD2vqraH
	1tXynMVn10srJJqv2BBfvj0lGMvic3BAAbzU9ewZ6hvCHxk5PfrXY=
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
Authentication-Results:	sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found:	No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status:	No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=burden, H*i:sk:0c48878, H*MI:sk:0c48878, H*f:sk:0c48878
X-HELO:	mail-lf0-f50.google.com
X-Google-DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=napcpk6J6T6YD3ivw/c6rLa8BabciBksiKxO5/hLlgc=; b=LRp5XVXoxqEGksoRk5iUEVTKZnmgy3ojGkn8t12JjbDyS4LoVLQodUNg3Zmou6BIGE N+i6aIWxZxY1tLVnddRTgon/wYHm/FXhKfuTGmtY80Re1HIc+pKEwzirOsJyy7dlcMaI QpTr677w7ut5jPCPmAlvDvUMlDimYYHY/l0mkBphZlXl3eFCxJCKJ247PobkShbsc4V+ S8pFvLB5VmeTm1/C6+wZhB7Sm2aOVDZXaS5RQjvyBgPO2oYM+nGabbyP/s/5MrTHKjwD C0ZJg+Vt4VmQKOFVMO1NdqJ4iX/51/HFFjEJIxCQmaDG221BpQHu+U2mYvgPALPf/YKL RFBQ==
X-Gm-Message-State:	AEkoout0dzgQ8eKwrgbFUH12d0OioPFXdy0Gqe9TTgsG2dP+cYbJdvHBX5gI0DJtgbfj9Q==
X-Received:	by 10.25.160.15 with SMTP id j15mr25914247lfe.109.1470428884378; Fri, 05 Aug 2016 13:28:04 -0700 (PDT)
Subject:	Re: PATHEXT is fundamental to Windows and Should be recognised by CYGWIN
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References:	<001001d1edf1$a4e1ae90$eea50bb0$@rogers.com> <1C0AE95E-0118-4353-AA77-4D41F1AE9AE1 AT solidrocksystems DOT com> <001a01d1eea9$f7949a90$e6bdcfb0$@rogers.com> <76ec05e9-140a-19cb-942b-698582c3d024 AT gmail DOT com> <001f01d1ef2c$f04af9e0$d0e0eda0$@rogers.com> <20160805152951 DOT GO25811 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <0c488787-0560-2c72-50ca-f5cd0a718104 AT gmail DOT com>
From:	Marco Atzeri <marco DOT atzeri AT gmail DOT com>
Message-ID:	<4f5b4aff-e79f-01c1-bf65-e285bfd6a5a7@gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 5 Aug 2016 22:28:00 +0200
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0
MIME-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<0c488787-0560-2c72-50ca-f5cd0a718104@gmail.com>
X-IsSubscribed:	yes

On 05/08/2016 21:43, cyg Simple wrote:
> On 8/5/2016 11:29 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>> On Aug  5 11:20, Michel LaBarre wrote:
>>> Hello cygsimple,
>>>
>>> Thanks for the advice regarding line length.
>>> I will try to remember to rein in my margins when emailing to cygwin.
>>>
>>> Thanks for your recognition of PATHEXT's potential value;
>>> reassuring to know I am not alone in my delusions.
>>>
>>> Regarding providing code, I am somewhat stale (though I spent my first 20 work years
>>> immersed in system code, assembly/C/Algol/Pascal/C++, building firmware for bit-sliced processors, etc.)
>>>
>>> The patch to which I referred is one I found while researching the topic;
>>> https://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2007-09/msg00127.html is one reference to it.
>>> It is old and likely out of date.
>>
>> That.  Plus, the refusal from cgf is still valid today.  If you see the
>> code required to handle .exe and .lnk extensions you don't *want*
>> PATHEXT support anymore.
>>
>
> I've seen that code and I still think it would be worthwhile to support
> PATHEXT.

I have the impression you are really underestimating the
negative consequence to add additional burden on the current code.


Regards
Marco




--
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 -