Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com From: Chris Faylor Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 13:56:14 -0400 To: cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com Subject: Re: Strange cd/CDPATH behavior Message-ID: <20000926135614.A4680@cygnus.com> Reply-To: cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com References: <00a601c027e0$ec31fb30$c4acb018 AT home DOT com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.6i In-Reply-To: <00a601c027e0$ec31fb30$c4acb018@home.com>; from enolte@campuspipeline.com on Tue, Sep 26, 2000 at 11:40:54AM -0600 On Tue, Sep 26, 2000 at 11:40:54AM -0600, Erik Nolte wrote: >> > The obvious answer is to stop using DOS style paths with cygwin cd's. >> > Unfortunately, what I'm really doing is "cd $SRC_PATH" where SRC_PATH is >> > "W:/src". SRC_PATH must be a DOS style path to keep javac and other >> > windows-based software happy (they can't grok paths without drive >> letters). >> >> Use cygpath... >> >cygpath -u -p c:/ >> / >> >> In your example, something like: >> cd $(cygpath -u -p $SRC_PATH) >> would probably work. > > >I wish I could, unfortunately the cd's are inside makefiles and scripts that >run both on cygwin/NT/Win2K and on Solaris. And the Suns aren't too happy >about cygpath. I can hack around the problem by unsetting CDPATH or >creating a SHELL_SRC_PATH (/c) and a APP_SRC_PATH (c:/). The interesting >thing is that B20.1 didn't exhibit the problem. How compatible should 1.1.4 >be with B20.1? > >I'm under the impression that B20.1 is obsolete and that Cygnus (or at least >the cygwin developers) would prefer people using 1.1.x. Is that true or >should we wait until 2.0? Check the cygwin web page at http://www.cygwin.com/ and draw your own conclusions. See if it mentions "2.0" and what it says about "B20.1". FWIW, I haven't seen anyone mention that this is a *bash* idiosyncrasy. Bash is apparently not dealing well with c:\foo style paths, which is hardly surprising. I doubt that these problems show up in Solaris since there is no possibility that you'll ever see a x:\ path there. I'm not sure why you are not using POSIX paths for what you need to do but if you need to use x:\ paths in bash your best alternative is to investigate the problem in the bash source and offer a fix to the bash maintainer. cgf -- Want to unsubscribe from this list? Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com