On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 02:35:41PM -0400, DJ Delorie wrote: > > > I still think it's a bad solution, though; it's imposing special > > semantics for process execution in libiberty, rather than the normal > > ones that you would expect from the OS. > > Doing that is part of the purpose of libiberty. If the OS does > something unusual, we try to make it act in a conforming way, so that > the rest of the tools need not worry about the OS differences. Adding > support for #! scripts is one of the ways we can make MinGW more > conforming (Cygwin and DJGPP already support #!) to the norm.
I'm inclined to agree that this seems like a natural use of libiberty; the purpose all along has been to isolate OS differences, fill in missing functions, etc. Mark, can you think of any specific negative consequences?
