Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@sourceware.cygnus.com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@sources.redhat.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@sources.redhat.com Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 15:08:45 -0500 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: gcc not creating .exe Message-ID: <20011129200845.GG11595@redhat.com> Reply-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com References: <718198F862F1D411B10F0002A50A4DB101A4F0BD@e90wwce3.dx.deere.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <718198F862F1D411B10F0002A50A4DB101A4F0BD@e90wwce3.dx.deere.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23.1i Yes, sorry for the confusion caused by being over enthusiastic in discounting the notion that cygwin1.dll would be installed in /usr/local/anything. setup.exe *does* create a /usr/local directory. However, the mere existence of this directory is no cause for concern. The packages installed by setup.exe do not use this directory. cgf On Thu, Nov 29, 2001 at 09:25:25AM -0600, Polley Christopher W wrote: >Windows NT Ver 4.0 build 1381 Service Pack 5, but it looks like this is >intended behavior... see hash::add_subdirs in >...\winsup\cinstall\install.cc, ca. line 170. > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Paul G. [SMTP:pgarceau@qwest.net] >> Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 4:56 PM >> To: cygwin@cygwin.com >> Subject: RE: gcc not creating .exe >> >> Platform? >> >> On 28 Nov 2001 at 10:38, Polley Christopher W wrote: >> >> > This statement isn't entirely true. I just did an experiment >> reinstalling >> > only bash, then ash; deleting before each time my /usr/local/bin, >> > /usr/local/etc, and /usr/local/lib directories. >> > >> > Although no packages explicitly contain the /usr/local directory >> (according >> > to http://cygwin.com/packages/), on these reinstalls, the >> /usr/local/bin, >> > /usr/local/etc, and /usr/local/lib directories are created (empty) >> > (suprisingly, even if /usr/local is marked read-only) >> > >> > So while there isn't anything installed under /usr/local, the mere >> existence >> > of a /usr/local tree doesn't, apparently, indicate an installation >> problem >> > (unless I'm doing something wrong... ) >> > >> > > >-- >Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple >Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html >Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html >FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ -- cgf@redhat.com Red Hat, Inc. http://sources.redhat.com/ http://www.redhat.com/ -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/