Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
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: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 20:01:35 -0400
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf-rcm AT cygwin DOT com>
To: cygwin-xfree AT cygwin DOT com
Cc: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: /etc/profile - futile try to predict order of execution (Please inform maintainer of 00xfree.sh)
Message-ID: <20030920000135.GD17343@redhat.com>
Reply-To: cygwin-xfree AT cygwin DOT com, cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-xfree AT cygwin DOT com, cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <NGBBLLIAMFLGJEOAJCCEMEFBDEAA DOT garbage_collector AT telia DOT com> <Pine DOT GSO DOT 4 DOT 56 DOT 0309191648290 DOT 12411 AT slinky DOT cs DOT nyu DOT edu> <20030919211128 DOT GA25109 AT redhat DOT com> <Pine DOT GSO DOT 4 DOT 56 DOT 0309191717470 DOT 12411 AT slinky DOT cs DOT nyu DOT edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.56.0309191717470.12411@slinky.cs.nyu.edu>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i

On Fri, Sep 19, 2003 at 05:23:40PM -0400, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
>On Fri, 19 Sep 2003, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2003 at 04:59:07PM -0400, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
>> >Speaking of your machine, could this be because you're using Win98?
>> >(Checking) Bingo!  Somehow, on Win98 find traverses files in unsorted
>> >order, i.e., the order they were created.
>>
>> Which is acceptable behavior, as I'm sure you know.  You can't rely on
>> any kind of predictable ordering behavior from find, AFAIK.
>
>Yes, it's acceptable, but I guess I'm not the only one spoiled by Win2k
>(judging by the contents of /etc/profile).

When I was debugging the never-ending "find misses the last directory"
problem, I was actually surprised to see that everything was returned in
alphabetic order.  It is nice to see predictable behavior in
opendir/readdir.  Too bad it isn't part of SUSv3.

>The reason I even tried to raise this point was that some scripts
>apparently did rely on this behavior, and I was asking whether, perhaps,
>/etc/profile should call these scripts in alphabetical order to satisfy
>these expectations.

Yes, I understand why you made the point and I agree 100%.  I was just
trying to forestall any "Cygwin should fix this" type of reasoning.

cgf

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/