Zsh Mailing List Archive
Messages sorted by:
Reverse Date,
Date,
Thread,
Author
Re: zshall.1
- X-seq: zsh-workers 21928
- From: Bart Schaefer <schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: Zsh hackers list <zsh-workers@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: zshall.1
- Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 14:58:41 +0000
- In-reply-to: <EXCHANGE03dgpyIb84V00007ae6@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Mailing-list: contact zsh-workers-help@xxxxxxxxxx; run by ezmlm
- References: <20051024080141.GA18213@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <EXCHANGE03dgpyIb84V00007ae6@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Oct 24, 10:03am, Peter Stephenson wrote:
} Subject: Re: zshall.1
}
} I'm not sure what use people put the --program-suffix option to; it's
} possibly they expect to be able to rename the files to the base programme
No.
The normal use of --program-suffix would be e.g. --program-suffix=.exe
so that e.g. "cc -o zsh main.o init.o ..." becomes "cc -o zsh.exe ..."
when using a unix-oriented build system on a Cygwin-type platform where
the underlying OS requires a file extension to create an executable.
It's not supposed to affect anything but the binaries, and for Zvi to
expect it to rename things inside the manual pages -- or for zsh's build
to already be doing so in some cases -- is unusual.
We can co-opt it in the way that 21924 and 21926 have (because zsh has
already got a different mechanism for appending .exe) but I'm sure that,
somewhere, Richard Stallman is frowning.
(Of course, he was probably frowning anyway.)
Messages sorted by:
Reverse Date,
Date,
Thread,
Author