Quoting Eli Zaretskii <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 09:45:59 -0400
From: Earnie Boyd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Quoting Eli Zaretskii <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>
>> I'm not sure if this is what you're saying but I wouldn't mind an option
>> but only if (and I can't believe I'm saying this) the default is
>> --with-dos-paths rather than --without-dos-paths.
>
> I'm saying two things: (a) I agree that the default should be with DOS
> paths, and (b) we need an option to turn DOS paths off only if the
> default behavior causes trouble in some situations.
>
I'm not sure I like a soft option but maybe DOSPATHS=false to turn it
off. I would still like the above configure switches.
Could you please tell why you think an option is needed? If the
default behavior doesn't cause any trouble, why do we need to create
an option in advance, before we hear any user complaints?
For the Cygwin variant which isn't currently using HAVE_DOS_PATHS users
may indeed want the option to build their version configured
--without-dos-paths. Why release a version of software where users
might complain so that you can then fix it?
Earnie Boyd
http://shop.siebunlimited.com
_______________________________________________
Make-w32 mailing list
Make-w32@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/make-w32
