From: ssh AT cray DOT com (Steven Hein) Subject: Re: cp/mv/rm problems with .exe extension filenames 16 Aug 1998 12:08:13 -0700 Message-ID: <35D4A0F6.61644B01.cygnus.gnu-win32@cray.com> References: <3 DOT 0 DOT 5 DOT 32 DOT 19980814095910 DOT 009d0100 AT pop DOT ma DOT ultranet DOT com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: gnu-win32 AT cygnus DOT com I've had several responses on this situation, and they all said about the same thing: there's a shell-script wrapper you can put around the 'install' command that will fix this. I understand that, and that would certainly make sense for Makefiles that use the 'install' command instead of the cp, mv, rm, etc. commands individually. BUT, what about the Makefiles that don't? As I said before, I've built several GNU-style packages (vim, bash, etc.), and all of them use the individual commands to install files, rather than using the 'install' command. So the install command fix doesn't truly fix all of the problems. Like I said before, this seems to be a major hole in the UNIX compatibility of GNU-win32. According to GNU standards.info: "The `configure' script and the Makefile rules for building and installation should not use any utilities directly except these: cat cmp cp diff echo egrep expr false grep install-info ln ls mkdir mv pwd rm rmdir sed sleep sort tar test touch true" So, these packages that I've tried to use are "standard" GNU packages, but they won't install. Hasn't anyone else seen this? Am I still missing something? I do realize that I could apply the same type of fix (a shell wrapper) to each of these files without a lot of work, but before I do that, I want to make sure I'm seeing this right. It just seems like a lot of other people would have had a lot of headaches over this situation! Steve Hein Silicon Graphics, Inc. ssh AT cray DOT com > > At 03:50 PM 8/13/98 -0500, you wrote: > >I'm definitely a newbie to GNU-win32, so please forgive me if this turns > >out to be a dumb question! > > > >I recently downloaded a "GNU-style" (uses ./configure) software package (the > >unix version of vim 5.1, specifically). It configured, and built as is, but > >when I went to install it, I found that the install targets in the Makefile > >couldn't copy the binary to /bin (where I wanted it). The problem boiled > >down to trying to do a: > > > >cp vim /bin > > > >The command failed because the file 'vim' did not exist--it is vim.exe! > >>From what I can tell, it looks like 'ls' handles filenames w/o the .exe > >extension, but the rest of the tools (rm, cp, mv, ??) don't! I've read > >the FAQ and didn't see anything concerning this. I have the same problem > >with other GNU-style packages (bash, etc.). This seems like a glaring hole > >with "unix compatibility".......am I missing something? I'm running B19.1 > >on Windows NT 4.0 SP3. > > > >Any help would be greatly appreciated!! > > > > .exe exists because Windows 95 (and things like the explorer) require it. > For compatibility reasons, .exe will likely persist, even though it is not > needed on NT by design and at least for execs run from bash. There have > been various solutions to the problems this causes for the install portion > of Makefiles from these packages. You might check the archive for an install > (or was it called ginstall) script that would do the .exe conversion for you > during installs. That has to be about a year back though, maybe more... > - For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to "gnu-win32-request AT cygnus DOT com" with one line of text: "help".