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 Message-ID: <40567D8B.9070102@fangorn.ca> Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 23:07:39 -0500 From: Mark Blackburn Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6b) Gecko/20031205 Thunderbird/0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: cp.exe bug References: <000801c40ab6$beb9f4c0$6501a8c0 AT RossLap> In-Reply-To: <000801c40ab6$beb9f4c0$6501a8c0@RossLap> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Ross Boulet wrote: [...] >Above is the makefile which produced the error. The cause seems to be cp's >handling of a .exe file. A simple way to get what I now see as a misleading >error message from cp is: > >$ touch foo.exe >$ cp foo bar # note the absence of the .exe extension >cp: `foo' and `bar' are the same file > > This problem still exists in the coreutils-5.2.0-1 package that I have recently posted on cygwin-apps. >Alan's issue arose from the fact that his makefile used a symbol for the >resulting executable and gcc naturally appends the .exe in the cygwin >environment. When he tries to use the symbol in his cp command, the .exe is >not there and cp gives the 'same file' error message. I did some googling >and found this issue has been mentioned in several threads. From what I can >gather, at least one iteration of fileutils would allow making a copy of a >.exe file without using the extension, as long as another file with the same >basename and no .exe extension did not exist. > >It looks like there was some code in fileutils 4.1-1 to handle .exe copies >like this, but the code was removed from the released cp in fileutils 4.1-2. > > I've been looking at the fileutils-4.1-1 and fileutils-4.1-2 source code and AFAICT there has been some .exe handling code ripped out between these versions. I assume it was problematic but I haven't been able to dig up a bug report that explains why it was taken out. >http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-announce/2001/msg00081.html > >http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2003-04/msg00017.html > > > > Mark Blackburn -- 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/