Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Message-ID: <00c101c0cde9$109554f0$28481ad8@default>
From: "Dennis Wilson" <lincwils AT teleport DOT com>
To: <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
References: <8F23E55D511AD5119A6800D0B76FDDE11E0F7A AT cpex3 DOT channelpoint DOT com>
Subject: Thanks. Re: Broken Bash 2.05? a configure can't find /bin/sh
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 17:37:21 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6700

The explanation is great. I can work around this. I just thought I had done
something wrong on my
upgrade and was preparing to reinstall.

Cygwin is a GREAT way for a unix person to get along with windows. I hope
you guys can continue.

Many thanks again.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Troy Noble" <troy DOT noble AT channelpoint DOT com>
To: "'Dennis Wilson'" <lincwils AT teleport DOT com>; <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 7:59 AM
Subject: RE: Broken Bash 2.05? a configure can't find /bin/sh


> bash doesn't get installed as /bin/sh, it gets installed as /bin/bash.
>
> The "ash" package (a Bourne shell clone) is the one that actually gets
> installed as /bin/sh.  So if you didn't install ash*.tar.gz, you've
> likely not got a /bin/sh.
>
> What we've done to get around this is install the "bash" package, but
> not the "ash" package, and then we:
>
> cp -p /bin/bash.exe /bin/sh.exe
>
> and that ensures that we are always running bash and that /bin/sh
> is always there.  We've standardized on BASH for our purposes here,
> so this is acceptable practice for our environment.
>
> YMMV.
>
> Troy
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dennis Wilson [mailto:lincwils AT teleport DOT com]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2001 8:08 PM
> To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
> Subject: Broken Bash 2.05? a configure can't find /bin/sh
>
>
> I ungraded my cygwin on my Win2k system. It now can't find sh.
> I did not do anything but run the setup and accept the packages that
needed
> to be upgraded.
>
> I was working on building tcl and when I went back into the directory to
run
> the configure script I got the following message.
>
> $ ./configure --enable-gcc
> bin/bash .configure: bad interpreter: no such file or directory.
>
> What appears to be going on is that the pathing has changed and /bin/sh is
> no longer valid.
> Any ideas??
>
>
> --
> Want to unsubscribe from this list?
> Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
>
> --
> Want to unsubscribe from this list?
> Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
>
>


--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple