On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 12:55:04PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >Hi David, > >I just wanted to make two comments based on your observations below. > > 1. File extensions are already optional on NT-based platforms. >Originally, > Cygwin didn't enforce ".exe" for exectuables. This was added for 9x/Me > support and will likely remain until these systems fall into disuse.
Cygwin doesn't enforce .exe for executables on any platform, AFAIK. Trying to run an executable without a .exe on Windows 9x just doesn't work, AFAIK. Also, Cygwin does handle '#!' shell scripts and it does look at magic numbers to determine if something is executable, when ntsec is not active. > 2. Based on the above, it's not clear that there's a big win to "adding > resources" to address this limitation for 9x/Me. However, since this > is an open-source project, if volunteers appeared that wanted to pursue > this, I expect the list would consider their patches. That's generally > the way the Cygwin project "adds resources". I know, it's a little > different than at work. ;-) Additional comments: The Cygwin/XFree86 mailing list is [EMAIL PROTECTED] If David had scanned the archives for this mailing list or even just looked at the last week worth of traffic, he could have spared himself a rant or at least he could have ranted in the correct forum. cgf -- Please do not send me personal email with cygwin questions. Use the resources at http://cygwin.com/ . -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
