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, 22 Dec 2004 17:19:31 -0500 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: cp and "are the same file" Message-ID: <20041222221931.GB9453@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i On Wed, Dec 22, 2004 at 02:05:50PM -0800, Jeremy C. Reed wrote: >On Sat, 18 Dec 2004, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: >>>The suffix is required on Win9x, AFAIK, so this is not a viable route. >> >>That said, I believe the OP didn't request that gcc not produce .exe >>files by default, only how can *he* make gcc not produce the .exe >>suffix. What you have to do is add a "." after the output (-o) >>filename[*]. Some projects define EXEEXT (or EXESUFFIX), so setting >>that to "." in yours could be all you need. > >Sorry that will not work for me. I am working with over 5000 build >mechanisms. I don't want to setup wrappers and other patches to add a >period hack after the output filename. So, what are you expecting then? If this isn't going to work for you and modifying your makefiles isn't a going to be a solution in any event, it's difficult to see what you are hoping for. A magic environment variable maybe? If so, unfortunately one does not exist. -- 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/