Re: 1.7.2?

[Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin at cygwin dot com>]

On Mar  2 14:12, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 02, 2010 at 11:53:00AM -0700, Eric Blake wrote:
> >According to Christopher Faylor on 3/2/2010 11:45 AM:
> >>> Yes, the script David sent in the latest mail in the thread.  But how
> >>> do you differe between a situation in which a file foo is renamed to
> >>> bar and the user does not want to add the .exe suffix (svn), and the
> >>> situation in which foo is renamed to bar and the .exe suffix should be
> >>> added (strip)?  I'm at a loss.
> >> 
> >> Ah, thanks.  I see the script now.  But it just demonstrates Cygwin
> >> working as planned.
> >
> >Isn't the idea that:
> >
> >rename("foo", "bar")
> >
> >should create "bar.exe" only if "foo" really resolved to "foo.exe" to
> >begin with?  In other words, what is the use case where someone wants
> >"foo" to become "bar.exe", but "foo.exe" did not exist, and they called
> >rename("foo","bar") instead of rename("foo","bar.exe")?
> 
> I thought the idea is that bar becomes bar.exe if we know that foo is
> really a PE-COFF binary.

That's what `strip foo' does.  It creates a temp file, writes the
stripped content of the executable into the temp file, removes the
original and then calls rename(temp_filename, "foo").  That's the
most common situation which (well...) requires to append the .exe
suffix automatically.


Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader          cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat