X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2006 15:47:05 -0400
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf-no-personal-reply-please AT cygwin DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: change in behavior of make from 3.80 to 3.81
Message-ID: <20060816194705.GB7674@trixie.casa.cgf.cx>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <6 DOT 2 DOT 3 DOT 4 DOT 2 DOT 20060815151104 DOT 0b40e260 AT pop DOT nycap DOT rr DOT com> <01b901c6c116$21259430$a501a8c0 AT CAM DOT ARTIMI DOT COM> <6 DOT 2 DOT 3 DOT 4 DOT 2 DOT 20060816091525 DOT 0ab90af0 AT pop DOT nycap DOT rr DOT com> <20060816144110 DOT GX20467 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <6 DOT 2 DOT 3 DOT 4 DOT 2 DOT 20060816111421 DOT 0b446b60 AT pop DOT nycap DOT rr DOT com> <20060816155054 DOT GY20467 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <Pine DOT GSO DOT 4 DOT 63 DOT 0608161418370 DOT 9095 AT access1 DOT cims DOT nyu DOT edu> <6 DOT 2 DOT 3 DOT 4 DOT 2 DOT 20060816144036 DOT 09695af0 AT pop DOT nycap DOT rr DOT com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <6.2.3.4.2.20060816144036.09695af0@pop.nycap.rr.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/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

On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 03:08:54PM -0400, William A. Hoffman wrote:
>At 02:20 PM 8/16/2006, Igor Peshansky wrote:
>>On Wed, 16 Aug 2006, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>>
>>Not only that, but the upstream maintainer actually suggested a couple of
>>avenues of investigation to make the patch smaller by using functionality
>>already built into the upstream make.  All that remains is for someone to
>>actually "do the work" (tm).

>So, it sounds like from the thread Paul suggested setting
>HAVE_DOS_PATHS to true for the cygwin build, but Christopher does not
>think that MS-DOS paths have a place in a cygwin version of make.
>
>I would be willing to try compiling the upstream make with
>HAVE_DOS_PATHS to see if it works for me.  However, if I report back
>that it works great, then what?  Christopher would you change the build
>for cygwin make to have this option?

The suggestion was that a patch be submitted upstream.  I agree with the
suggestion and have amplified on it a little in another message.

This suggestion does not require further input from me.  If I was interested
in being involved in coming up with a patch, I'd have already done so.

I'm not interested in playing any further games of catch-up with you or
anyone else.  Please don't try to involve me in your attempts to modify
the upstream make.  However, should you actually come up with a patch, I
will monitor the make mailing list and, if I have any objections, I'll
make them there.

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/