X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 14:52:59 -0400 (EDT) From: Igor Peshansky Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com To: Michael Hirsch cc: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: Why are Windows paths broken in make 3.81? In-Reply-To: <9c2aabaf0607260912n4d17a340j533a049565234c00@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: References: <9c2aabaf0607211629u4e29ffa1w5f09b3d8e5a923fc AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <9c2aabaf0607260912n4d17a340j533a049565234c00 AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: 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 On Wed, 26 Jul 2006, Michael Hirsch wrote: > On 7/21/06, mwoehlke wrote: . Thanks. > > Michael Hirsch wrote: > > [snip] > > > Is it broken only on Windows? > > > > That sounds like a silly question... 'are Windows paths only broken on > > Windows?' > > It sounds like a silly question, but it isn't. I tested, and yes, if > you have a directory named "c:" in Linux, make is broken on that > directory, too. Since "c:" is a valid name in Linux (and POSIX, I > believe) I consider that a bug in make. I'll have to report that to > GNU, as it is not a cygwin issue. The error message on Linux is just > as incomprehensible as it is Cygwin, too, so at least I know who to > talk to about it. While ':' is a valid filename character on Linux (though not on all filesystems, obviously), it is a special character in make. So you need to be careful when using it in Makefiles. Just like '>' is a valid filename character, but you would not expect to be able to use it unquoted in your shell. > > > Is this a cywin only bug? What possible reason could there be to > > > introduce this deliberately? > > > > No, as it is not a "bug". However it is specific to Cygwin. See the > > aforementioned announcement. CGF would have to speak to "why" (and I > > would appreciate if he would, just because I am curious :-)), but I > > would guess it is to "encourage" people to use correct (i.e. POSIX) > > paths. > > I guess that was the reason. How disappointing. I always thought > that cygwin provided a great service by allowing me to use both > windows and posix paths. I'll miss that capability a lot. I don't think any of the Cygwin package maintainers would deliberately break existing functionality for some purist reasons. Besides, there's no need to guess. CGF already stated the reason: maintaining a Cygwin-specific patch to support this functionality has become too cumbersome, and CGF decided that his volunteer effort is better spent doing other, more important things for Cygwin. HTH, Igor -- http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/ |\ _,,,---,,_ pechtcha AT cs DOT nyu DOT edu | igor AT watson DOT ibm DOT com ZZZzz /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ Igor Peshansky, Ph.D. (name changed!) |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' old name: Igor Pechtchanski '---''(_/--' `-'\_) fL a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-. Meow! "Las! je suis sot... -Mais non, tu ne l'es pas, puisque tu t'en rends compte." "But no -- you are no fool; you call yourself a fool, there's proof enough in that!" -- Rostand, "Cyrano de Bergerac" -- 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/