Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-apps-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender:	cygwin-apps-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-apps-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-apps-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/lists.html#faqs>
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Date:	Sat, 10 Nov 2001 23:38:38 -0500
From:	Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To:	cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: symlinks
Message-ID:	<20011111043838.GA22496@redhat.com>
Reply-To:	cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
References:	<EA18B9FA0FE4194AA2B4CDB91F73C0EF08F28B AT itdomain002 DOT itdomain DOT net DOT au> <3BEDFE95 DOT 3000200 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu>
Mime-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<3BEDFE95.3000200@ece.gatech.edu>
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.3.23.1i

On Sat, Nov 10, 2001 at 11:29:09PM -0500, Charles Wilson wrote:
>Robert Collins wrote:
>
>>When extracting tarballs, should setup create 'native' symlinks or magic
>>cookie symlinks?
>
>I thought the magic cookie (!<symlink>target) symlinks were deprecated. 
>Currently, "ln -s" makes "special" .lnk shortcuts; I think setup should do 
>the same -- there should be no difference between the following scenarios:

They're not exactly deprecated.  I think Corinna has had second thoughts
about the current method, actually.  Or, maybe she just didn't like
having cygwin interpret native Windows .lnk files.

I don't anticipate that they will ever go away, so I think we should stick
with having setup.exe create the "old style" method.  It will keep the
code size down in setup.exe.

Or, maybe this will become a non-issue when/if setup.exe is split in two
since we'll be able to use cygwin tar at that point.

cgf

- Raw text -