On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 11:23:49PM -0500, Gary R. Van Sickle wrote: >> From: Eric Blake >[snip] >>You asked, so I'll answer. Yes, it is an accident that other tools >>understand c:/. > >It's no accident that make used to, and now again will, be supporting >Windows paths. People put considerable time and effort into making it >work originally, and then again just recently in finally solving the >problem and pushing the fix upstream.
...and, if you're playing along at home, it has been shown that Eli's change still may not be right. >[snip] >>Another example of a program that parses its arguments is make; you >>need only read last months archives for the debate about make 3.80 vs. >>make 3.81 for proof that using DOS paths in cygwin programs is ASKING >>for problems. > >I think you're misreading the make issue. Using Windows paths in make >was apparently never "asking for problems" until the last release, at >which time a problem was introduced, a solution was found, pushed >upstream, and the problem is now solved (or will be when the next >Cygwin build is released). Actually, once again, the "make automatically understands MS-DOS paths" behavior was a bug. This behavior was supposed to be controlled by a command-line option or an environment variable (if you don't believe me, ask Geoff Noer). That's why I specifically mentioned the option and the environment variable in my announcement. Apparently, I broke make somewhere along the line, people got used to the behavior that I inadvertently introduced, and they then considered automatic detection of MS-DOS paths to be a Constitutional right. cgf -- 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/
