From:	"Laurynas Biveinis" <lauras AT softhome DOT net>
Date:	Fri, 29 Jun 2001 22:03:08 +0200
To:	Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Cc:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: bash 2.04 build failure?
Message-ID:	<20010629220308.B545@lauras.lt>
Mail-Followup-To:	Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>,
	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
References:	<3395-Wed20Jun2001200621+0300-eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il> <3B3890D8 DOT 12023 DOT 1A6E91 AT localhost> <20010628184544 DOT B205 AT lauras DOT lt> <20010629142627 DOT B205 AT lauras DOT lt> <3395-Fri29Jun2001175316+0300-eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il> <20010629174913 DOT C659 AT lauras DOT lt> <6436-Fri29Jun2001200811+0300-eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Mime-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<6436-Fri29Jun2001200811+0300-eliz@is.elta.co.il>
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.3.18i
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

> It looks like Bash should generally prefer scripts to programs, and
> .exe programs to raw COFF programs.  Is that true?

Well, I might have skipped something in this discussion, but IMHO
scripts over programs preference is not neccesarry. What is needed is
to put .bat and .com at the end of search list and .exe before extensionless.

Just what did bash do in its own copy of dosexec.c previously? It worked
very good.

Laurynas

- Raw text -