On 18 August 2010 20:39, Christopher Faylor wrote: > On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 09:34:46PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >>On Aug 18 15:22, Christopher Faylor wrote: >>> On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 03:19:06PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote: >>> >>already does for the environment. Dropping the environment had roughly >>> >>the same consequences way back when, after all. >>> > >>> >Except that not every program uses the windows environment. This affects >>> >quite a few native windows calls. >> >>It affects every program which calls CreateProcess or ShellExecute, for >>instance. This includes GDB, tcl, run, run2, cygstart, etc. > > And, the current change affects every one of those programs and more.
Right, that's a pretty big argument for favouring Windows integration rather than Linux compatibility here. So what would be the consequences of not allowing the current working directory of a running process to be deleted? >>> And, for that reason, I think we should reconsider this change. Maybe >>> as a compromise maybe we could at least avoid cd'ing to the dummy >>> location on entry to the first cygwin program. >> >>I disagree. When do you change the directory to //?/pipe then? The >>first time chdir is called? > > Yes. I'm not convinced such a compromise would be worthwhile, because it would forfeit Linux compatibility while still breaking some Win32-using programs. I think it should be one way or the other: either stick with the current approach, or always sync the Win32 working directory up-to-date (except when that's not possible). Andy -- 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
