Bug: Cabal + Windows + extensions on executables
ndmitchell at gmail.com
Tue Nov 7 13:57:04 EST 2006
> Hmm, that's tricky. How do you propose that we solve it?
> Currently we specify a name without the extension. On windows of course
> most executables have a .exe extension so we automatically append that.
> We don't want people to have to say:
> executable: foo.exe
> since then it's not portable to non-windows. So how can we infer that no
> extra .exe extension is required? Is it reasonable to guess that if it
> already has one '.' in the name that we shouldn't add a .exe extension?
Yes, I think thats the logic GHC seems to use, so you need logic that
I think in this case I'd rather the generated executable from GHC was
index.cgi.exe on Windows and just index.cgi on Linux - but I'm not
sure how to get that going.
More information about the cabal-devel