Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-developers-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-developers/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-developers-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-developers-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Date:	Tue, 9 Oct 2001 22:43:55 +0400
From:	egor duda <deo AT logos-m DOT ru>
X-Mailer:	The Bat! (v1.53 RC/4)
Reply-To:	egor duda <cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com>
Organization:	deo
X-Priority:	3 (Normal)
Message-ID:	<1225778878.20011009224355@logos-m.ru>
To:	Christopher Faylor <cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com>
Subject:	Re: Ignore the CYGWIN environment variable if child of a cygwin process?
In-Reply-To:	<20011009133655.A25333@redhat.com>
References:	<20011009133655 DOT A25333 AT redhat DOT com>
MIME-Version:	1.0

Hi!

Tuesday, 09 October, 2001 Christopher Faylor cgf AT redhat DOT com wrote:

CF> I keep seeing people who have set the CYGWIN environment variable from the bash
CF> shell.  This causes strange problems.

hmm. on the first glance only 'ntsec' and 'tty' options may cause
trouble when changed on-the-fly. OTOH, they're probably most important
options in CYGWIN env. variable. if we can pinpoint those options that
are really prohibited from changing during "cygwin session" we can
ignore only them. but 1) there may still be "legitimate" ways to
change such options; 2) changing other options may still produce
unexpected results to the people who don't know what they're doing.

CF> I wonder if it would be worthwhile to ignore the CYGWIN environment variable
CF> if it is set in a process that is a child of a cygwin process.

CF> The downside is that there are probably some situations where it
CF> actually works ok to do this and that we'll end up screwing up people
CF> who know what they're doing.

it'd definitely screw some of my scripts. and what's most
disappointing, i can't see any workarounds if such change is made. 

CF> We could just issue a warning but I hate for cygwin to be noisy in these kinds
CF> of situations.

CF> Any thoughts?

I hate to sound non-constructive, but i think we'd better leave things
as is. current situation is not good, but i don't see any better
alternatives.

Egor.            mailto:deo AT logos-m DOT ru ICQ 5165414 FidoNet 2:5020/496.19

- Raw text -