This is the mail archive of the
cygwin
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: Running Windows scripts & PATHEXT
Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
Ugh. I fully agree with CGF - the "hide the extension" business is
ugly, counterproductive, and should not be used.
Well Cygwin's already doing it WRT things like .exe and .lnk... :-)
Having said that, is there any reason why
$ ln -s myscript.pl myscript && chmod a+x myscript.pl
doesn't do the trick? AFAIK, Windows doesn't attempt to execute files
with no extension, so it won't interfere with CMD, and will allow bash
to execute myscript.pl by typing "myscript"...
Nah it'd work. Just that I'd have to create additional links for every
myscript I come up with! That's what I was trying to avoid.
The situation with VB scripts is harder. I'd go for something like
$ cat > myscript << EOF && chmod a+x myscript
#!/bin/bash
cscript /nologo myscript.vbs
EOF
if you wanted to run "myscript.vbs" by just typing "myscript". FWIW,
if there were a way to get Visual Basic to ignore the shebang line at
the top, there's a way of specifying the right script interpreter,
too, so that you could run "myscript.vbs" directly, but I guess VB
will punt on that, so I won't go into details.
Well one thing that I did was create a .cmd file that runs the .vbs with
cscript instead of wscript but again, having to create and maintain an
additional file (myscript.cmd calls myscript.vbs with cscript) *plus*
have to make a symlink for myscript -> myscript.cmd (would that even
work?!? - your example was a symlink -> a .pl file not a .cmd that calls
a .vbs, etc....) is just getting way to messy...
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/