Re: src/winsup/cygwin ChangeLog syscalls.cc
On 05/11/2009 13:03, Dave Korn wrote: %PATHEXT% Ah, but that doesn't have ".sys". Doh. And it does have a lot of extensions that are NOT PE/COFF executables (e.g. .bat). Wonder if there's a more complete list in the registry somewhere. I think the only reliable way will be to detect .sys and friends manually. :-( In the meantime, should this change be reverted? Yaakov -- 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
Re: src/winsup/cygwin ChangeLog syscalls.cc
Dave Korn wrote: > Christopher Faylor wrote: >> On Thu, Nov 05, 2009 at 07:22:25PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >>> Probably we would need to check for any kind >>> of Windows executable suffix like .exe, .sys, .com. I have to admit, >>> though, that I never saw a .src suffix for a Windows binary... >> Well, in this case we could just look for alphabetic suffixes. But that's >> probably too kludgy. > > %PATHEXT% Ah, but that doesn't have ".sys". Doh. Wonder if there's a more complete list in the registry somewhere. cheers, DaveK -- 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
Re: src/winsup/cygwin ChangeLog syscalls.cc
Christopher Faylor wrote: > On Thu, Nov 05, 2009 at 07:22:25PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >> Probably we would need to check for any kind >> of Windows executable suffix like .exe, .sys, .com. I have to admit, >> though, that I never saw a .src suffix for a Windows binary... > > Well, in this case we could just look for alphabetic suffixes. But that's > probably too kludgy. %PATHEXT% cheers, DaveK -- 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
