X-Recipient: archive-cygwin@delorie.com X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2010 12:45:58 +0100 From: Corinna Vinschen To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: executing .bat & .cmd files with 1.7 Message-ID: <20101218114558.GA18211@calimero.vinschen.de> Reply-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com References: <4D0BB3F6.5000607@cygwin.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: 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 On Dec 17 19:41, Andy Koppe wrote: > 2010/12/17 Vincent Côté-Roy: > > I'm sorry, I wasn't very clear:  xyz.bat or xyz.cmd do indeed execute > > as before. My problem is that when I type xyz (i.e. without the > > extension) it won't find xyz.bat or xyz.cmd, as it did before > > upgrading. > > It did not do that. Not on the Cygwin 1.5.25 install here anyway. Maybe Vincent is using tcsh. Older tcsh took .bat and .cmd extensions into account, newer versions don't. That's a deliberate change since the behaviour diverged from the standard POSIX behaviour. If you have a shell script called "foo.sh" or "foo.csh", you have to give the full name "foo.sh" or "foo.csh". You can't start them just specifying "foo". In Cygwin, only the .exe and .lnk suffixes have a special meaning for obvious reasons. Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat -- 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