X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=4.9 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_50,BOTNET,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Message-id: <4C128B1C.3080407@cygwin.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2010 15:14:36 -0400
From: "Larry Hall (Cygwin)" <reply-to-list-only-lh AT cygwin DOT com>
Reply-to: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.1.21) Gecko/20090320 Remi/2.0.0.21-1.fc8.remi Lightning/0.9 Thunderbird/2.0.0.21 Mnenhy/0.7.5.0
MIME-version: 1.0
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: 'cp' utility bug when <dest-name>.exe file exist.
References: <4C1279E9 DOT 9070807 AT cygwin DOT com> <2BF01EB27B56CC478AD6E5A0A28931F20101D804 AT A1DAL1SWPES19MB DOT ams DOT acs-inc DOT net>
In-reply-to: <2BF01EB27B56CC478AD6E5A0A28931F20101D804@A1DAL1SWPES19MB.ams.acs-inc.net>
Content-type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.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 6/11/2010 2:32 PM, Nellis, Kenneth wrote:

<snip>

> ...
>
> The link refers us to the "(no)transparent_exe" CYGWIN option with
> the following explanation:
>
>      This option has been removed because the behaviour it
>      switched on is now the standard behaviour in Cygwin.
>
> This seems to presume that the new (with 1.7) "standard" behavior
> is what everyone wanted, which now seems to be in dispute. To me,
> it seems like a good option to retain.

In retrospect, one could define this in any way that fits the current
mindset.  It was, however, implemented as a test stepping-stone to
moving the transparent handling of exe magic into the Cygwin DLL and
out of various packages.  Since the test is complete, the option is
no longer needed or implemented.

Given what's been discussed in this thread, restoring this option would
be a piece of the puzzle at best and turning off the option would leave
those that chose this route with a Cygwin environment that is less
like Linux when building/porting packages, for example.

I didn't bring this particular retired CYGWIN option as possible
solution to this thread of discussion.  I brought it up to answer a
specific question about whether such an option could be introduced
allowing an "either/or" option without too much performance impact.  One
may argue whether the latter was achieved.  But I personally don't think
there's much benefit to having such a switch in the long run, even if
something were going to change here.  It may be a useful thing while
things are changing.  But if the end result is something that doesn't
satisfy everyone's needs without some people needing to fiddle with
some obscure switch, the concept itself is flawed.  FWIW, I don't get
the impression anyone was suggesting a switch would be the means to
the end.

I should also point out that this topic has had some history too, all
of which is available for perusal in the email archives.  If you (I'm not
specifically referring to you here Ken - I'm speaking more generally) have
an idea or point that you'd like to make that you think will sway
someone to make some change for you, it's worthwhile taking a wander
through the email archives to see if anything like this has been
discussed in the past.  It might save you some grief and help you
understand more about where the project's been.

-- 
Larry Hall                              http://www.rfk.com
RFK Partners, Inc.                      (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office
216 Dalton Rd.                          (508) 893-9889 - FAX
Holliston, MA 01746

_____________________________________________________________________

A: Yes.
> Q: Are you sure?
>> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
>>> Q: Why is top posting annoying in email?

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