Message-Id: <199702232011.FAA08447@mail.st.rim.or.jp>
From: "Daisuke Aoyama" <jack AT st DOT rim DOT or DOT jp>
To: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>,
        "Alexander V. Lukyanov" <lav AT video DOT yars DOT free DOT net>
Cc: <djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com>
Subject: RE: bashb7.zip is now available.
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 1997 05:08:58 +0900
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il> wrote:
>
> On Sun, 23 Feb 1997, Alexander V. Lukyanov wrote:
> 
> > IMHO, the proper solution is to support SYSROOT in the c library.
> > That way, bash won't need to guess what is a pathname and what is not.
> > The same about //d/.
> 
> I'm afraid that's a libc rewrite.  I don't have time to even think about
> all the implications of such a change.  For starters, all the places
where
> the pathname is checked for `:' as its second character will have to be
> taught about the //d/ thing.  Anyway, `bash' is already very close to
> being perfect (at least for the tasks I need it; and I didn't see anybody
> else complaining about these issues), so I'm not sure such a massive
> change could be justified. 

I support almost Eli's comment. If use / or //d/ at  your own risk,
a rewrite (_put_path?) may be needed. But that is last choice.

Daisuke Aoyama
jack AT st DOT rim DOT or DOT jp