Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 21:38:18 +0100 From: Marcel Telka To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: Determining the location of a Cygwin installation Message-ID: <20030326203818.GB3487@tortuga.etc.sk> References: <200303261832 DOT 53052 DOT jld AT ecoscentric DOT com> <3E81FE8B DOT 9060008 AT Salira DOT com> <00ab01c2f3d4$e9b05920$cf6d86d9 AT ellixia> <3E820C43 DOT 8080400 AT Salira DOT com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3E820C43.8080400@Salira.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i On Wed, Mar 26, 2003 at 12:23:31PM -0800, Andrew DeFaria wrote: > Elfyn McBratney wrote: > > >But as cgf (the Really Cool Manager) said the registry keys are not to > >be relied on as they might not be there forever. > > Yeah but what I'm saying is that there should be a commitment to at > least one registry entry which denotes the [active] installation path of This goal could be reached by adding the directory into the PATH. If this is not done be default using setup.exe (which is not), then you could add it by hand... I don't see any problem with this. If you want to add this behaviour into setup.exe, then PTC IMHO. :-) -- +-------------------------------------------+ | Marcel Telka e-mail: marcel AT telka DOT sk | | homepage: http://telka.sk/ | | jabber: marcel AT jabber DOT sk | +-------------------------------------------+ -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/