X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Message-ID: <451D589C.9070609@cygwin.com> Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2006 13:32:12 -0400 From: "Larry Hall (Cygwin)" Reply-To: cygwin@cygwin.com User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.0.5) Gecko/20060727 Fedora/1.5.0.5-1.fc4.remi Thunderbird/1.5.0.5 Mnenhy/0.7.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: Similar Bash 3.1.18 CR/LF Problem References: <657A9BE009D3504AAE29BD8E8C2DD61E01A5ABDB@SDGEXEVS02.corp.intuit.net> <451C8D98.4030302@byu.net> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@cygwin.com Igor Peshansky wrote: > On Thu, 28 Sep 2006, Eric Blake wrote: > >> According to Wilks, Dan on 9/28/2006 3:59 PM: >>> That was my guess. But since this was the cygwin installer run off >>> of the cygwin site I thought I'd mention it, if for no other reason >>> than tracking purposes. Maybe there's a problem with the installer / >>> postinstall script when downgrading? Or perhaps that's intended >>> behavior. It was just surprising. >> It's intended behavior; the postinstall script was not written with >> downgrades in mind (I may rethink that for my next release; but, it won't >> help you, because downgrading to 3.1-8 or earlier will not have this patch). >> >>> And... it didn't run again when re-upgrading just bash to the new >>> (broken) version so we had to manually copy bash.exe to sh.exe. >> What makes you think the current version is broken? In my opinion, it >> works just fine. However, your discovery that using Windows paths >> instead of POSIX paths makes cygwin revert to binary file opens on text >> mounts is rather interesting. I don't know if cygwin1.dll is at fault >> for that strange behavior. It may be possible for me to patch bash to >> always convert script names to POSIX before opening them, so that you >> would get the right mount behavior, but I'm not looking forward to such >> a hack. > > IIRC, Cygwin explicitly treats out-of-mount (Win32) paths as binary. > Igor Yes, that's fits my recollection as well. Since both of us recall this, there's no need for anyone to check the source. Two IIRCs means we must be right! ;-) -- Larry Hall http://www.rfk.com RFK Partners, Inc. (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office 216 Dalton Rd. (508) 893-9889 - FAX Holliston, MA 01746 -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/