This is the mail archive of the
cygwin
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
RE: Bug: cygport fails when the working directory pathname contains spaces
- From: "Nellis, Kenneth" <Kenneth dot Nellis at acs-inc dot com>
- To: <cygwin at cygwin dot com>
- Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 08:12:43 -0600
- Subject: RE: Bug: cygport fails when the working directory pathname contains spaces
- References: <4B600397.8030505@users.sourceforge.net>
> From: Yaakov (Cygwin/X)
> Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2010 04:13
> To: cygwin@cygwin.com
> Subject: Re: Bug: cygport fails when the working directory pathname
> contains spaces
>
> On 27/01/2010 02:36, Matthias Andree wrote:
> <snip/>
> > If you're unwilling to fix the cygport parts of the bug, that's fine,
> > but claiming that fixing it were generally not worthwhile amounts to
> > blessing insecure programming practices.
>
> Remember that cygport serves a single purpose: to build packages, and
> "fixing" cygport will not guarantee that a package will build in a path
> containing spaces. For instance, both (autoconf-)configure and libtool
> (by far the most common build system out there) are shell scripts, and
> have certainly not worked in these situations in the past. (I can't
> speak for the current situation wrt these tools.) So there is little
> benefit in pretending to fix cygport when the result will be exactly
> the same.
>
> Maybe I should just include a sanity check to force cygport not to run
> in such paths instead.
>
> > Of course fixing cygport won't assure its user that the package
> itself
> > is safe in paths with blanks, but at least then you can say that
> you've
> > done your part and the fix is SOEP (someone else's problem).
>
> Shifting the blame on to others won't help anybody one bit. The
> package
> STILL will not build, so what has anybody gained?
>
> > That other parts might fail is NOT AN excuse to not do your own job
> in a
> > way that breaks other people's expectations.
>
> I've been around long enough to know that many (most?) people's
> expectations about Cygwin are generally incorrect. As for those who
> generally use cygport, namely package maintainers, they obviously DON'T
> USE SPACES because I can't remember such a complaint before.
>
> > I'd seriously ask you to reconsider.
>
> And if this were bugzilla I would be deciding between closing this
> NOTABUG or WONTFIX. :-)
>
>
> Yaakov
Despite not having a dog in this fight, I feel compelled to go on
record to support Mathias and the OP that this is an obvious defect
in cygports that ought to be fixed. I think an appropriate sanity
check would be on a decision "to force cygport not to run in such
paths" instead of fixing the defect.
--Ken Nellis