RE: UNC and POSIX paths

2013-06-18 Thread Fedin Pavel
Hello! > > If we do consider this, I think we should take a step back and think > > about revamping path handling to allow hooks for things like /dev, > > /proc, /cygdrive rather than having to special case them. > > SHTDI, as you said... But it'd be interesting advancement in /etc/fstab > evolu

Re: UNC and POSIX paths

2013-06-18 Thread Andrey Repin
Greetings, Christopher Faylor! > And, it nontrivially complicates path handling since we'd have to make > decisions about whether to honor // or not. That's an easy decision: "//" should remain as Cygwin/POSIX equivalent of "\\" AKA UNC path access. If anyone want to argument against it with brok

Re: UNC and POSIX paths

2013-06-18 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Jun 18 11:05, Earnie Boyd wrote: > On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 10:36 AM, Christopher Faylor wrote: > > > > And, it nontrivially complicates path handling since we'd have to make > > decisions about whether to honor // or not. > > > > I'd suggest using /// for UNC, dropping exactly one / if FILEPATH

Re: UNC and POSIX paths

2013-06-18 Thread Earnie Boyd
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 10:36 AM, Christopher Faylor wrote: > > And, it nontrivially complicates path handling since we'd have to make > decisions about whether to honor // or not. > I'd suggest using /// for UNC, dropping exactly one / if FILEPATH[0] and FILEPATH[1] is equal to /. -- Earnie --

Re: UNC and POSIX paths

2013-06-18 Thread Christopher Faylor
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 10:30:09AM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote: >On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 12:26:32PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >>On Jun 17 22:47, g...@malth.us wrote: >>> On Mon, 17 Jun 2013, at 21:42, Christopher Faylor thusly quipped: >>> >>> > On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 07:18:12PM -0700, g

Re: UNC and POSIX paths

2013-06-18 Thread Christopher Faylor
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 12:26:32PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >On Jun 17 22:47, g...@malth.us wrote: >> On Mon, 17 Jun 2013, at 21:42, Christopher Faylor thusly quipped: >> >> > On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 07:18:12PM -0700, g...@malth.us wrote: >> >> BTW, along the same lines, I stated previously

Re: UNC and POSIX paths

2013-06-18 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Jun 17 22:47, g...@malth.us wrote: > On Mon, 17 Jun 2013, at 21:42, Christopher Faylor thusly quipped: > > > On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 07:18:12PM -0700, g...@malth.us wrote: > >> BTW, along the same lines, I stated previously it would break > >> http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=gnulib.git;a=

RE: UNC and POSIX paths

2013-06-17 Thread Fedin Pavel
Hello! > Does replacing "/" with "/." help or does it not help? I cannot test > this right now. Yes, it does, this is how i did it. So - yes, it is also a matter of convenience, and time needed to find this workaround. Kind regards, Pavel Fedin Expert Engineer Samsung Electronics Research cent

Re: UNC and POSIX paths

2013-06-17 Thread Václav Zeman
On 06/18/2013 08:20 AM, Fedin Pavel wrote: > Hello! > >> Because some scripts try to use >> >> $(DESTDIR)/$(PREFIX) >> >> rather than >> >> $(DESTDIR)$(PREFIX) > > Yes, exactly, this is what i have got. > I start to have these problems when i try to do non-standard things like > cross-compilin

RE: UNC and POSIX paths

2013-06-17 Thread Fedin Pavel
Hello! > Because some scripts try to use > > $(DESTDIR)/$(PREFIX) > > rather than > > $(DESTDIR)$(PREFIX) Yes, exactly, this is what i have got. I start to have these problems when i try to do non-standard things like cross-compiling Linux kernel and some 3rd party modules. :) Ability to r

RE: UNC and POSIX paths

2013-06-17 Thread gmt
On Mon, 17 Jun 2013, at 21:42, Christopher Faylor thusly quipped: > On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 07:18:12PM -0700, g...@malth.us wrote: >> BTW, along the same lines, I stated previously it would break >> http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=gnulib.git;a=blob_plain;f=m4/doub >> le-sl ash-root.m4. Turn

Re: UNC and POSIX paths

2013-06-17 Thread Christopher Faylor
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 07:18:12PM -0700, g...@malth.us wrote: >BTW, along the same lines, I stated previously it would break >http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=gnulib.git;a=blob_plain;f=m4/double-sl >ash-root.m4. Turns out I was wrong, the m4 has a hard-coded list of >platforms. So, I have t

Re: UNC and POSIX paths

2013-06-17 Thread Andrew DeFaria
On 06/17/2013 07:18 PM, g...@malth.us wrote: Mostly, I couldn't resist giving a literal answer to Andrew's (maybe-not-so-literally-intended) question of "why not fix it?" (nevertheless, I did fix it, already). I see, and I rest my case... -- Andrew DeFaria A Clean House Is

RE: UNC and POSIX paths

2013-06-17 Thread gmt
On Mon, 17 Jun 2013, at 11:19, Larry Hall (Cygwin) thusly quipped: > So it's a question of convenience vs correctness. It seems the argument offered > is that it is convenient to allow incorrect scripts. An alternate argument could be > made that it is equally convenient to continue having Cygwin

Re: UNC and POSIX paths

2013-06-17 Thread Dan Kegel
Andrew DeFaria wrote: >>> I'm confused. Let me ask a different way - why not fix such scripts >>> instead? >> >> He's probably daunted by the thought. >>[snipped description of how to approach this huge task] > > Doesn't really address the question. Armed with the tool I outlined, one could have a

Re: UNC and POSIX paths

2013-06-17 Thread Andrew DeFaria
On 06/17/2013 12:01 PM, Dan Kegel wrote: Andrew DeFaria wrote: I'm confused. Let me ask a different way - why not fix such scripts instead? That's all I'm asking. He's probably daunted by the thought. Doesn't really address the question. OK, I'm out of here... -- Andrew DeFaria

Re: UNC and POSIX paths

2013-06-17 Thread Dan Kegel
Andrew DeFaria wrote: > I'm confused. Let me ask a different way - why not fix such scripts instead? > That's all I'm asking. He's probably daunted by the thought. If he really wants to change the world here, he should consider writing a tool that scanned for such problems, and lobbying to get it

Re: UNC and POSIX paths

2013-06-17 Thread Andrew DeFaria
On 06/17/2013 10:54 AM, g...@malth.us wrote: As to why not fix the upstreams committing these atrocities, it's the obvious reason -- occasionally one encounters a large body of dense, non-fixable-by-sed/perl, poorly commented "spaghetti" script-code that makes "clever," deep usage of the assump

Re: UNC and POSIX paths

2013-06-17 Thread Andrew DeFaria
On 06/17/2013 10:35 AM, Achim Gratz wrote: Andrew DeFaria writes: I'm trying to understand the reluctance towards "fixing the problem" and instead the insistence on "putting a band aid on it". So in the above, why would you not instead do --prefix=/usr/local? Because some scripts try to use $(

Re: UNC and POSIX paths

2013-06-17 Thread Larry Hall (Cygwin)
On 6/17/2013 1:54 PM, g...@malth.us wrote: On Mon, 17 Jun 2013, at 10:07, Andrew DeFaria thusly quipped: On 06/17/2013 08:12 AM, g...@malth.us wrote: Why not simply fix the "not very well written configure scripts and makefiles"instead? BTW I've never come across a single one of those. Where ar

RE: UNC and POSIX paths

2013-06-17 Thread gmt
On Mon, 17 Jun 2013, at 10:07, Andrew DeFaria thusly quipped: > On 06/17/2013 08:12 AM, g...@malth.us wrote: >>> Why not simply fix the "not very well written configure scripts and >>> makefiles"instead? BTW I've never come across a single one of those. >>> Where are you getting yours? >> Can't ans

Re: UNC and POSIX paths

2013-06-17 Thread Achim Gratz
Andrew DeFaria writes: > I'm trying to understand the reluctance towards "fixing the problem" > and instead the insistence on "putting a band aid on it". So in the > above, why would you not instead do --prefix=/usr/local? Because some scripts try to use $(DESTDIR)/$(PREFIX) rather than $(DESTD

Re: UNC and POSIX paths

2013-06-17 Thread Andrew DeFaria
On 06/17/2013 08:12 AM, g...@malth.us wrote: Why not simply fix the "not very well written configure scripts and makefiles"instead? BTW I've never come across a single one of those. Where are you getting yours? Can't answer this offhand (aware you didn't ask me :P) but, under the misguidance of

Re: UNC and POSIX paths

2013-06-17 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Jun 17 17:36, Fedin Pavel wrote: > Hello! > > I decided to pay attention to one more problem. Lots of not very well > written configure scripts and makefiles like to access things like > '//usr/bin'. Under Cygwin this causes problem because Cygwin treats '//' in > Windows-style as access to n

RE: UNC and POSIX paths

2013-06-17 Thread gmt
On Mon, 17 Jun 2013, at 06:57, Andrew DeFaria thusly quipped: > On 06/17/2013 06:36 AM, Fedin Pavel wrote: >> Hello! >> >> I decided to pay attention to one more problem. Lots of not very >> well written configure scripts and makefiles like to access things >> like '//usr/bin'. Under Cygwin

Re: UNC and POSIX paths

2013-06-17 Thread Dan Kegel
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 6:36 AM, Fedin Pavel wrote: > I decided to pay attention to one more problem. Lots of not very well > written configure scripts and makefiles like to access things like > '//usr/bin'. Under Cygwin this causes problem because Cygwin treats '//' in > Windows-style as access t

Re: UNC and POSIX paths

2013-06-17 Thread Christopher Faylor
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 05:36:42PM +0400, Fedin Pavel wrote: > Hello! > > I decided to pay attention to one more problem. Lots of not very well >written configure scripts and makefiles like to access things like >'//usr/bin'. Under Cygwin this causes problem because Cygwin treats '//' in >Windows-s

Re: UNC and POSIX paths

2013-06-17 Thread Andrew DeFaria
On 06/17/2013 06:36 AM, Fedin Pavel wrote: Hello! I decided to pay attention to one more problem. Lots of not very well written configure scripts and makefiles like to access things like '//usr/bin'. Under Cygwin this causes problem because Cygwin treats '//' in Windows-style as access to ne