This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the Cygwin project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: non-setup information in setup.hint (was Re: Maintainers/Packages List, 2003

>It's a bit contrived, but...

A *bit* contrived?

Certainly not a byte contrived. A nybble contrived perhaps?

>~$ ./setup.hint
>bash: ./setup.hint: binary-only: bad interpreter: No such file or directory
>Perhaps the special comment should be something other than the shebang?
>Just a thought.

I pledge to never try to execute setup.hints and be confused by the
output if I see the above.  I certainly hope that the rest of the cygwin
maintainers take that pledge as well.


You're missing the point. I didn't post that because I expected people to go around executing setup.hint files. Rather, I posted it to illustrate that the chosen syntax has an already established meaning and Cygwin is an environment where the executable bit is often faked by looking for that syntax. The choice of syntax is arbitrary. Why overload the shebang when it would be just as simple to choose something else? That's all I was trying to say.

But I don't feel strongly about it; it was merely a light-hearted observation. As I said "Just a thought."

Have a nice day

P.S. Just don't go defining any tags named 'rm' and suchlike. :)

Need a shot of Hank Williams or Patsy Cline? The classic country stars are always singing on MSN Radio Plus. Try one month free!

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]