This is the mail archive of the cygwin 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: Inconsistence on file operation when the name already exists with exe extension

On 7/10/2012 11:24 AM, Earnie Boyd wrote:
On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 4:34 AM, Aaron Schneider wrote:
You're right that cygwin shell tries to emulate bash, I just twisted things.

You're still wrong. Cygwin is a POSIX library for Windows. Bash is a shell capable of being built with that POSIX library for use on Windows but it isn't an emulation of Bash, it *is* Bash. Other shells available on *nix is also available for Cygwin.

The problem is that in unix executables don't have extension but they
actually do in cygwin so I think that's the root of the problem.

They don't need one in Cygwin either; as a matter of fact it was an
addition to binutils in the second generation of Cygwin that added the
.exe to the executable because it was more natural for Windows and
Windows at the time wouldn't execute the binary without the .exe

Probably compiling binaries under cygwin without the exe extension,
like  unix, is not an alternative, or is it? Cygwin may detect if it is executable
checking if it's PE format; if it is perl script. Just check if file is
present in path or run. /file

False. It is wholly possible, you just have to pass the correct flags to the linker process. Current windows versions since at least XP and maybe before would run files that did not contain a .exe extension.

All true. And all discussed before, as Chris pointed out earlier. Earnie and others are being very helpful to the OP by reviewing this stuff again.

It's great to ask questions and explore boundaries but what's better
is to explore new boundaries and ask new questions.  I'd also encourage
that those interested in this area (and I am certainly one) review what's
been said on this subject so far so that any further discussions will be
engaging for all.



A: Yes.
> Q: Are you sure?
>> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
>>> Q: Why is top posting annoying in email?

Problem reports:
Unsubscribe info:

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