On 8/5/2016 11:29 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > On Aug 5 11:20, Michel LaBarre wrote: >> Hello cygsimple, >> >> Thanks for the advice regarding line length. >> I will try to remember to rein in my margins when emailing to cygwin. >> >> Thanks for your recognition of PATHEXT's potential value; >> reassuring to know I am not alone in my delusions. >> >> Regarding providing code, I am somewhat stale (though I spent my first 20 >> work years >> immersed in system code, assembly/C/Algol/Pascal/C++, building firmware for >> bit-sliced processors, etc.) >> >> The patch to which I referred is one I found while researching the topic; >> https://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2007-09/msg00127.html is one reference to it. >> It is old and likely out of date. > > That. Plus, the refusal from cgf is still valid today. If you see the > code required to handle .exe and .lnk extensions you don't *want* > PATHEXT support anymore. >
I've seen that code and I still think it would be worthwhile to support PATHEXT. -- cyg Simple -- 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
