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 Message-ID: <010a01c0ceb8$128b7e90$28481ad8@default> From: "Dennis Wilson" To: References: <8F23E55D511AD5119A6800D0B76FDDE11E0F7A AT cpex3 DOT channelpoint DOT com> <00c101c0cde9$109554f0$28481ad8 AT default> <20010425221833 DOT C3536 AT redhat DOT com> Subject: Re: Thanks. Re: Broken Bash 2.05? a configure can't find /bin/sh Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 18:19:13 -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 Thanks again, I did understand that not my whole installation was bad. I just had to check what was missing. The ash gzip was on my machine, since I install and upgrade in two passes. What was interesting was that my ash got uninstalled. Fat mouse syndrome I guess (on my part). ----- Original Message ----- From: "Christopher Faylor" To: Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 7:18 PM Subject: Re: Thanks. Re: Broken Bash 2.05? a configure can't find /bin/sh > On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 05:37:21PM -0700, Dennis Wilson wrote: > >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. > > Actually, as I noted, the explanation did not really explain your problem. > It appears that there *is* something wrong with your installation if you > don't have a /bin/sh. > > >Cygwin is a GREAT way for a unix person to get along with windows. I hope > >you guys can continue. > > Well, cygwin seems to be gaining in popularity both without and within > (despite a few annoying nay-sayers) Red Hat so it looks like we'll be > hear for a while. > > cgf > > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "Troy Noble" > >To: "'Dennis Wilson'" ; > >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