tar won't extract all files when a file with exe extension precedes the same without extension inside the archive

Andy Hall fixpertise-consulting@comcast.net
Fri Jul 13 16:20:00 GMT 2012


> 
> > 2.  Since this is a "Windows thing", is there some reason why the
> execution
> > of "file" or "file.exe" isn't handled as a special case in the exec call
> > (and all its flavors) and no place else?
> 
> make, for example? If you have a rule that creates "foo" from foo.c,
> gcc will actually create "foo.exe". The next time you run make, it
> won't see "foo" and recreate "foo.exe", even if "foo.exe" is still
> up to date.
> 
> With the special handling of .exe, when make checks for "foo", cygwin
> checks "foo" first, doesn't find anything, and then checks "foo.exe",
> returning its result to make and make is happy.
> 
> Anothen example: A script tries to execute "foo" from . , cygwin
> executes "foo.exe" instead and the script thinks "foo" exists,
> but a subsequent "touch foo" (or "rm foo" or whatever) fails, which
> is massively inconsistent.
> 
> I consider the current handling of .exe files quite consistent.
> 
> Or, in other words, when forced to choose between the two pains,
> I'd rather endure this.
> 
> Otto
> 
Well, this seems to be something that has to be addressed specifically in
make and gcc (and other similar places).  If make has a rule to create "foo"
from foo.c, then that is what it should do!  Dennis Ritchie would turn over
in his grave is he heard that commands like tar, rsync, zip, ... were not
idempotent WRT at least filenames and contents, let alone permissions.  

Andy



--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple



More information about the Cygwin mailing list