Brian Dessent <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote around 02 Jul 2003
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> I agree that REG_EXPAND_SZ is "nicer" in terms of not hard-coding
> paths, but since $CYGROOT is non-standard I don't see that it matters
> too much.
Yes <giggle>. (Finding this so much fun, there's nothing like throwing
megatons of programming technique at a tiny little problem that several
readers are no doubt snickering at ...).
So, next escalation is to either write a dialogue (either in the C version
or sticking to scripting, maybe cook up a .WSH script). If doing the
scripting version, we'll have Perl do some heuristics, first checking for
%CYGROOT% and accepting whatever that is, IF it is defined, and next,
looking in the "standard" (M$-speak: "well known") place (C:\Cygwin), and
if that fails write code to find a Cygwin key in the Registry and pull the
install location out of that. OR we could just tell users that they must
execute it in the CYGROOT (top of Cygwin location), and find a way to put
the cwd into the .REG entries before executing.
Now that I think of it, the latter is the most sensible notion, if we were
sticking to scripting. But I like the C version which is far superior.
Anybody know how to put a little Cygwin icon next to the context-menu
entries where "SFN CygPath" and "LFN CygPath" appear? ;-) (this is most
likely an OLE / COM thing and far more work than it's worth... ?)
More later...
--
"So, tell me, my little one-eyed one, on what poor, pitiful,
defenseless planet has my MONSTROSITY been unleashed?"
- Dr. Jumba, Disney's "Lilo & Stitch"
OpenPGP Key at http://savannah.gnu.org/people/viewgpg.php?user_id=6050
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
