MSYS mode (continue)

Larry Hall (Cygwin Developers) lhall@cygwin.com
Mon Jul 29 18:11:00 GMT 2013


On 7/29/2013 8:20 AM, Charles Wilson wrote:
> On 7/29/2013 7:19 AM, Earnie Boyd wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 7:00 AM, LRN wrote:
>>>> - make w/ DOS path handling
>>> Yes. Note that the code DOES exist in make, but is disabled when make is
>>> built for Cygwin. One might question whether it was a good idea to
>>> disable support for W32 paths in make that runs on W32 (with a
>>> compatibility layer, but still...) in the first place.
>>>
>>
>> MSYS has never modified the make source and it uses the CYGWIN coding.
>>   The only thing is we do accept windows pathing in the form of
>> C:/SOME/DIR but not C:\SOME\DIR.
>
> No.
>
> Here's the patches applied to msys's make-3.81

<snip>

> I've archives all the patches I used when I last built the msys apps -- it's
> over 1MB after xz compression.  I'll figure out somewhere to put it and post
> the link later today.
>
> Here's the file listing -- 151 different patches to 56 different products.
> Some were unofficial, since I never actually published my msys-tcl port.

<snip>

Interesting.  Assuming a review of all these patches (and any future MSYS or
even Cygwin-specific patch) won't either be jettisoned as no longer needed
or viewed as common functionality desired in the unified MSYS/Cygwin
universe, I'm starting to think the question of whether EXEs are "drop-in"
chameleons for MSYS or CYGWIN is an implementation detail that the user
should not know about or exploit.  We don't want users to have to
understand which EXEs are exactly the same code for both MSYS and Cygwin
and which aren't.  Worse, we don't want to have to determine which EXE the
user has "dropped-in" when they report an issue.  By these statements, I'm
not saying that the "drop-in" capability shouldn't be used where possible. 
But if it is used, it should be something entirely opaque to the user.
Even beyond that, we should actively hide this technical "sugar" from the
end users to avoid the potential support nightmare.  This shouldn't be a
big deal though.  We'd just need to install all the tools for each
environment separately.

-- 
Larry



More information about the Cygwin-developers mailing list