G
G. Randall
I installed Cygwin after I installed an ActiveState Perl distribution.
I'm perfectly content with the ActiveState setup, and while I could
simply re-run the Cygwin setup and exclude perl, I'd like to better
understand what the interaction is. If someone could answer the
following, I'd be grateful.
1. Are there any advantages (from an administrative point of view) to
using Cygwin's perl vs. ActiveState's? My gut feeling is that Cygwin
would require more work to maintain.
2. If I were to use ActiveState's perl, will renaming Cygwin's perl.exe
suffice for the moment? It seems to do the trick, but I'm wondering
whether there's something else related I'm not aware of.
3. If I place a script foo.pl somewhere in my path, I can execute it
elsewhere using the Windows 2000 cmd interpreter by typing "foo.pl". In
Bash, I can type "cmd /C foo.pl". What I don't understand is why under
Bash "perl foo.pl" doesn't work unless I run it from where foo.pl is
actually located.
Thanks!
I'm perfectly content with the ActiveState setup, and while I could
simply re-run the Cygwin setup and exclude perl, I'd like to better
understand what the interaction is. If someone could answer the
following, I'd be grateful.
1. Are there any advantages (from an administrative point of view) to
using Cygwin's perl vs. ActiveState's? My gut feeling is that Cygwin
would require more work to maintain.
2. If I were to use ActiveState's perl, will renaming Cygwin's perl.exe
suffice for the moment? It seems to do the trick, but I'm wondering
whether there's something else related I'm not aware of.
3. If I place a script foo.pl somewhere in my path, I can execute it
elsewhere using the Windows 2000 cmd interpreter by typing "foo.pl". In
Bash, I can type "cmd /C foo.pl". What I don't understand is why under
Bash "perl foo.pl" doesn't work unless I run it from where foo.pl is
actually located.
Thanks!