Mail Archives: cygwin/2002/10/21/15:25:06
On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 12:55:04PM -0400, lhall AT pop DOT ma DOT ultranet DOT com wrote:
>Hi David,
>
>I just wanted to make two comments based on your observations below.
>
> 1. File extensions are already optional on NT-based platforms.
>Originally,
> Cygwin didn't enforce ".exe" for exectuables. This was added for 9x/Me
> support and will likely remain until these systems fall into disuse.
Cygwin doesn't enforce .exe for executables on any platform, AFAIK. Trying to
run an executable without a .exe on Windows 9x just doesn't work, AFAIK.
Also, Cygwin does handle '#!' shell scripts and it does look at magic numbers
to determine if something is executable, when ntsec is not active.
> 2. Based on the above, it's not clear that there's a big win to "adding
> resources" to address this limitation for 9x/Me. However, since this
> is an open-source project, if volunteers appeared that wanted to pursue
> this, I expect the list would consider their patches. That's generally
> the way the Cygwin project "adds resources". I know, it's a little
> different than at work. ;-)
Additional comments: The Cygwin/XFree86 mailing list is cygwin-xfree AT cygwin DOT com.
If David had scanned the archives for this mailing list or even just looked at
the last week worth of traffic, he could have spared himself a rant or at least
he could have ranted in the correct forum.
cgf
--
Please do not send me personal email with cygwin questions.
Use the resources at http://cygwin.com/ .
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
- Raw text -