> Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2006 17:30:50 -0400 > From: Christopher Faylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: > > >One thing: my original idea was to have a configure option that > >enabled the DOS path capabilities. I note some here are advocating a > >configure test which simply sets the HAVE_DOS_PATHS option if Cygwin > >is detected, rather than leaving it up to the user. Is it the case > >that people might want to build a Cygwin version of make _WITHOUT_ DOS > >path support? > > > >Something to think about anyway. > > I'm all for flexibility. I suspect that this will have to be the default > for cygwin, however, or we will hear wails of despair from any brave soul > who tries to build from source.
100% agreement. The less obscure switches with hard-to-explain effects, the less FAQs asked on the various mailing lists. We should introduce such a switch only if we cannot avoid it (i.e. if supporting DOS file names breaks something very valuable in the Cygwin version). _______________________________________________ Make-w32 mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/make-w32
