On 02/15/2013 11:46 AM, Larry Hall (Cygwin) wrote:
I believe these questions are the crux of your inquiry so I've stripped
out the surrounding details. Apologies if you feel I've removed
something
you feel is a significant point.
This goes to the heart of a difference between how Windows and Linux
treat
executables and various ingrained assumptions both make about their
respective expectations (essentially what Adam said ;-) ). Cygwin
does try
to bridge this gap but it has its limits as well. This is actually not
new issue and has been discussed many times in the past on this list. If
you're interested in the details or, even better, in improving what's
currently implemented, I'd recommend reviewing previous discussions, the
ideas they generated, and the issues and limitations mentioned. That
should help you understand the current state and provide you with an
informed basis if you want to take a swing at providing some patch.
The only short answer I can give you is that the current state is a
compromise. That doesn't mean there isn't a better one. Just that
it's a complicated area for many reasons so getting to a better state
is also complicated.
Fair enough. I'd like to take a crack at it once I clear some other
things off of my plate first. Will have to look through previous
conversations before I know if it's something I can competently tackle.
Thanks.
-jack-
--
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