Mail Archives: cygwin/2000/05/27/12:45:09
On Sat, May 27, 2000 at 12:27:19PM -0400, Larry Hall (RFK Partners, Inc) wrote:
>Date: Sat, 27 May 2000 12:27:19 -0400
>To: "Parker, Ron" <rdparker AT butlermfg DOT com>,
> "cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com" <cygwin AT hotpop DOT com>
>From: "Larry Hall (RFK Partners, Inc)" <lhall AT rfk DOT com>
>Subject: RE: File name syntax (WAS: RE: FW: Can not config sshd)
>In-Reply-To: <200005262126 DOT RAA23411 AT acestes-fe0 DOT ultra DOT net>
>
>
>
>At 05:22 PM 5/26/00, Parker, Ron wrote:
>> > Right. The significance is for UNC paths which can be easily
>> > access currently
>> > using "//<server name>/<share name>" in Cygwin now...
>>
>>Understood. My intention was that server:share would be converted to
>>\\server\share before it reached the Windows file API's used inside of
>>cygwin.
>>
>>The entire idea was that many UNIX programs parse the colon paths as network
>>paths already and this would bring cygwin a little more inline with the UNIX
>>world.
I missed this. I don't think there are many UNIX *systems* out there which
parse colons in pathnames. Cygwin == a UNIX system.
>Actually, I should have said "//<server name>/<share name>/<path>" to be
>clear.
>
>I guess as long as the NFS style syntax was supported by Cygwin and was
>supported in all places that the current UNC paths are supported in Windows
>(i.e. *everywhere*), there shouldn't be any loss of functionality with this
>change...
I really don't understand what you are referring to. When you mount a NFS
directory you do use something of the form 'mount foo:/bar /baz' but the
parsing of the colon is a function of mount not of the UNIX OS. Programs
like cp, cat, etc. do not treat colon separated filenames differently.
Is this whole discussion really just about changin cygwin's mount command
so that it accepts foo:/bar names?
cgf
--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
- Raw text -