On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 16:51, Christopher Faylor wrote: > On Wed, Jun 09, 2010 at 10:50:34AM -0400, Stephen Morton wrote: >>We use a make environment that is part cygwin and part pure windows >>executables (long story). And it all works in linux too. I suspect >>it would break in the worst ugly ways if the .exe magic did not exist. > > And, it is this kind of thing that the .exe magic is trying to help. It > wasn't implemented because of Windows 95. It is there because many UNIX > apps expect executables to have .exe extensions. >
!!!! What kind of executables? Windows ones? Fine. Cygwin ones? Only if it is poorly written Makefile - i.e., does not use $(EXEEXT)... Is this one of those cases where the cumulating user errors are more important than the ultimate project objective (POSIX compliance/transparency)? > Changing to whole distribution to not use .exe is a huge undertaking for > little gain. > I think it is a little more than... a little gain. But that's subjective, of course. Nevertheless, I do agree - it's a daunting task. Just one that doesn't necessarily must be done all at once... -- ___________ Julio Costa -- 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
