On Tue, 6 Aug 2019 19:09:04, Lavrentiev, Anton (NIH/NLM/NCBI) [C] via cygwin" wrote: > > zero-sized? Irrelevant. > > It is actually very relevant. Because executing an empty script results in= > "success" (exit code 0) -- that creates a false-positive.
Good morning Anton, Sorry for being brief (and not being clear!). (and sorry for being late to the party :-) What I meant, was: a regular file (empty or not), but w/o shebang and w/o the execute bit, will be executed by Cygwin, contrary to what happens on Unix. This behaviour (again: different from Unix) has existed for at least a decade. That is why I wrote: Cygwin != Linux. When I found out, years and years ago, I assumed that the deviation was due to FAT filesystems (not being able to represent the x-bit). Perhaps I was wrong. Perhaps the Cygwin maintainers merely goofed up long ago. Henri -- 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
