X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Message-ID: <484842DE.2010804@tlinx.org> Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2008 12:47:42 -0700 From: Linda Walsh User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (Windows/20080421) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: Patch to allow Cron to use non-POSIX shells like Powershell.exe and CMD.exe References: <2abc9c2d0806050258n18191f38i1188b0e9d83ed7ae AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> In-Reply-To: <2abc9c2d0806050258n18191f38i1188b0e9d83ed7ae@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Blair Sutton wrote: > Eric Blake writes: > >> Why should we patch a cygwin utility to promote the use of a non-cygwin shell? --- None of the shells are 'cygwin', really, -- they are shells that took their ideas from close-source Bell-Labs research. But before they became open source, Bell labs allowed students to use it for free -- and it became popular -- eventually clones were developed and even later eventually, most of the bell labs sources were opened up. But how about also doing it for reasons of increasing interoperability? To make cygwin more useful to more people? To increase the value of cygwin? I dunno...bunches of reasons... Maybe some open-source type will try it and create an open source clone -- but if they can't use it from cygwin, they might never try it...by smiting everything closed source, you close off sources of ideas. Open source doesn't have a monopoly on good ideas or design. Besides, I thought patches were the big thing you guys were always clamoring for, yet the few times I've seen one submitted, it's been attacked... Is it any wonder why anyone would not want to *even* try to submit a patch or package? Like people need that hostility when trying to help out. I know that attitude keeps me away from submitting code virtually anywhere -- unless I have it to a level of perfection that it can be unassailable. I'm not usually willing to put in that level of perfection as a 'gift' to someone if I'm fearful of getting critically reamed. I'm not always considered sensitive, but when I'm being "open" enough to "open" my code, I am putting "myself" out there...I don't need extra crap dumped on me just for trying to 'donate' or 'help out'. > To increase/improve productivity. To move along with the times. --- Yeah...that too... > No one can argue that Powershell isn't a good shell taking some of the > best features of many popular shells before it. --- Personal: Oh boo! it's another incompatible, close source MS util. If I wanna use it on anything else, I'm screwed. Can't put it on linux, or Bsd...that just sucks. I hate limited time offers, or limited use-products -- if I like them, I want to be able to use them as I see fit...but that's not allowed with MS...though, please forgive me for everything I've said if MS has made it open-source....no strings...then, just kick me, insult me... at least I'd deserve it... That said -- I know attitude is my own personal stuff and just cause I don't wanna use it doesn't mean I don't support your right to use it ... So don't think that I would not want you to be able to use the shell of your choice, whatever that may be...:-) > >> Sending text files as application/octet-stream makes them harder to read in >> email. Consider using a text MIME type instead. --- Yeah -- what he said! :-)...first time for everything.... Hey...I just clicked on the attachment in firefox, and told it to open with a text editor -- it opened just fine. Um...ahhh...went back to text-only 'Mail'....it wasn't so friendly...but as computer people, shouldn't we be able to simply "grok" (read" base 64?)...Our schools are so deficient these days... >> You should fix your mailer to not send duplicate copies of a message when >> writing to a text-only mailing list. --- Ya got me on this one -- I only saw one message come onto the list. Checked in text-only 'Mail', as well -- no dups there...was it sent to multiple addresses maybe? Since I only got one copy on my from the cygwin list. > > I just used GMails default. I'm not sure if I can do what you want. --- I'm not sure how it would send a duplicate...but I don't use gmail. But's that's no reason why you shouldn't hack into Google's mail servers and fix the problem......*cough*....:-) >> And what's wrong with doing this with what cron already provides: >> * * * * * /cygdrive/c/windows/system32/windowspowershell/v1.0/powershell - >> Command '"c:\documents and settings\blair sutton\my >> documents\windowspowershell\test\test.ps1" one two three' > > This doesn't work. Have you tried? --- Uh.oh, Eric, you mean you just "assumed" it worked and didn't test it? (ok, I might have assumed similar). I was, in fact curious as to why cron wouldn't "just work" with a different shell. Maybe it's a more general problem or bug - in calling any win-shell not recompiled for Cygwin? I.e. if I was to use a win32 compiled version of bash (assuming there was one), maybe it would have some problems too? > Also why not support any shell - > that's what Paul Vixie originally intended right? > >> I'm not the cron maintainer, but I hope he doesn't bloat the code for this. > > Four extra lines of code is bloat to you? > Perhaps you are being a little sensitive here don't you think? --- And Eric's not the meanest of the bunch (no offense Eric!) Maybe he's been polishing his style...George Bush's idea of 'compassionate[sic] conservatism' sets such a fine example for the country... ;~} -- 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/