Re: Unidentified subject!
On Mon, 2003-06-09 at 15:09, ${john}$ wrote:
> The .exe suffix screws things up. A lot of packages identify the target
> as Cygwin, and your executables then get that extension. Then the build
> fails because a filename is hard-coded in a makefile somewhere
> (debian/rules, for example). If you ask me, the .exe has to go. No other
> Debian platform uses an extension for exectuables, and you're not going
> to persuade everyone to change their packages to accommodate it. So I
> guess that means fixing config.guess, so it can identify Debian win32
> systems and act appropriately; then and rebuilding gcc. Something like that.
Don't do this. The .exe suffix should stay. There have been many long
discussions on this elsewhere, I won't repeat them now.
> Then there's the filename problem -- normally, Windows doesn't do
> certain characters, for example colons. You'll hit this one building
> packages for perl-doc, defoma, spamassassin, countless Perl modules,
> etc. Apparently you can turn on POSIX compliance, which sounds like the
> way to go. In a previous discussion I think people suggested patching
> newlib to substitute another character, but I don't like the idea of
> changing filenames. It just opens up more potential problems (eg
> breaking hard-coded filenames in scripts and configs, risks clashes with
> other files in Debian, etc).
Well, IIRC : isn't in the POSIX portable filename list anyway - which is
pretty short. Win 9x will -never- do colon (it doesn't have a POSIX
mode), and AFAIK : will still refer to alternate streams on NT kernels.
Changing filenames is the right thing to do, and has been addressed for
many existin cygwin packages. (There are folk using spamassasin on
cygwin, for instance). But hey, don't let me stop you from a world of
pain.
Cheers,
Rob
(I maintain the copy of dpkg available via cygwin's setup - and yes, I
know it's not exactly recent).
Reply to: