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:date:from:to:subject:message-id:reply-to
	:references:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; q=dns; s=
	default; b=OEGMr2bNzg6IKXq8oZunrvG/yFCJPVoAzqSyCwrDi84+ITM1r4Ys8
	dYoxjRvWDtHux8R70itY+z9dzyUp6Vy5RAvQc07A4/4AySGLJ2w3j4OmV+BTnLGg
	gqrKr5XcNPjiYO6oAFvzvnAh+zjwlFfQ6zkXVMTOrGUEEflZ/O/cNE=
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:date:from:to:subject:message-id:reply-to
	:references:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; s=default;
	bh=Ds6D7dz5bHn2ie4xfzkbUjxO88s=; b=k0stpb4N627zv57fafERutaFV8RF
	mZ/1SV52+chRBU5VJ/7RezlQIIusTcwi9g/3NVP00UkpFE/EfZvdmMXBZEl/EJCh
	D9xjbTQiMMawxZbJGcl6U+qIQFynVuDy8TI6hDAprTiOFLYzpC+3p/5f90QrUyJp
	WQffdza8kctWaTA=
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=-94.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,GOOD_FROM_CORINNA_CYGWIN,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RCVD_IN_BRBL_LASTEXT,RCVD_IN_PBL,RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL,RDNS_DYNAMIC autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=Hx-languages-length:1640, H*f:sk:e90174d, H*i:sk:e90174d, H*MI:sk:e90174d
X-HELO:	calimero.vinschen.de
Date:	Mon, 8 Aug 2016 16:03:26 +0200
From:	Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: PATHEXT is fundamental to Windows and Should be recognised by CYGWIN
Message-ID:	<20160808140326.GR25811@calimero.vinschen.de>
Reply-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-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> <57A6ED1C DOT 1060402 AT gmx DOT de> <20160808112321 DOT GF32150 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <e90174df-61b4-17c8-064b-30009e6ad559 AT gmail DOT com>
MIME-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<e90174df-61b4-17c8-064b-30009e6ad559@gmail.com>
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.6.2 (2016-07-01)

--5AmtYbcgdBTTPS58
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Aug  8 09:43, cyg Simple wrote:
> On 8/8/2016 7:23 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > On Aug  7 10:11, Herbert Stocker wrote:
> >> On 05.08.2016 17:29, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >>  If you see the
> >>> code required to handle .exe and .lnk extensions you don't *want*
> >>> PATHEXT support anymore.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Moreso, this code has recently broken my C++ code in Cygwin.
> >> It tried to see if a directory  /dir/subdir/something  existed,
> >> and Cygwin said yes because it found a /dir/subdir/something.exe .
> >> So my program failed.
> >=20
> > I have some doubt here.  Cygwin always checks for "foo" first.
> > Only if it doesn't find "foo", it checks for "foo.exe", then
> > for "foo.lnk" and last, for backward compat, for "foo.exe.lnk".
> >=20
>=20
> Which is the exact cause of the issue.
>=20
> > In the POSIX realm, "foo" =3D=3D "foo.exe" =3D=3D "foo.lnk".  The searc=
h itself
> > is indiscriminately, because Cygwin can't know if you're looking for
> > "foo" or "foo.exe" or a symlink "foo" using the .lnk suffix.
>=20
> Why do you say "In the POSIX realm"?  Only Cygwin does this association.
>  I understand why it does so but is there a different way to achieve the
> same thing with greater accuracy?

No, sorry, but no.  Every time you start to double guess what the
application is looking for in a certain scenario, you lose.  See
the example I just made up in=20

https://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2016-08/msg00124.html

And it's just *one* very simple example.


Corinna

--=20
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer                 cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat

--5AmtYbcgdBTTPS58
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
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=nVsE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--5AmtYbcgdBTTPS58--

- Raw text -