Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Message-ID:	<023301c09d19$6de0b4c0$0200a8c0@lifelesswks>
From:	"Robert Collins" <robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au>
To:	<cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
References:	<3A957332 DOT FD98DFF6 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu> <17B78BDF120BD411B70100500422FC6309E210 AT IIS000> <20010222184404 DOT S908 AT cygbert DOT vinschen DOT de> <3A955952 DOT 6FF234D4 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu> <20010222140454 DOT F13561 AT redhat DOT com> <3A957332 DOT FD98DFF6 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu> <4 DOT 3 DOT 1 DOT 2 DOT 20010222155316 DOT 02f226c8 AT pop DOT ma DOT ultranet DOT com> <4 DOT 3 DOT 1 DOT 2 DOT 20010222163130 DOT 02f24e40 AT pop DOT ma DOT ultranet DOT com>
Subject:	Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT]: Important change to symbolic linkfunctionali ty
Date:	Fri, 23 Feb 2001 08:50:08 +1100
MIME-Version:	1.0
X-Priority:	3
X-MSMail-Priority:	Normal
X-Mailer:	Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE:	Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
X-OriginalArrivalTime:	22 Feb 2001 21:42:37.0322 (UTC) FILETIME=[5F7DA6A0:01C09D18]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry Hall (RFK Partners, Inc)" <lhall AT rfk DOT com>
To: "Earnie Boyd" <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Sent: Friday, February 23, 2001 8:34 AM
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT]: Important change to symbolic
linkfunctionali ty


> At 04:30 PM 2/22/2001, Earnie Boyd wrote:
> >You misunderstand Corinna.  She is saying that the *.lnk files
wouldn't
> >be in the tarball only the attribute of the links and the *.lnk file
> >would be recreated when extracting it from the tarball.  The *.lnk
file
> >itself would not be extracted but recreated.
>
>
> Ah, OK.  I guess I don't know how the "attribute of the links" are
represented
> but if the symlinks are recreated, that should take care of the basic
problem.
> So these "attributes" would still be platform specific, just like the
current
> symlinks, right?
>
>
>
> Larry Hall                              lhall AT rfk DOT com


Well symlinks _are platform specific_. You can't pick up the inode from
a 64 bit filesystem and drop it onto a logical sector of a ext2fs
filesystem and expect it to work. It just so happens that nearly every
unix filesystem has a symlink flag.

As I understand cygwin's tar's behaviour, it stores a file, with the
symlink bit set in that tarball, and the content the path to the new
file - just as gnu tar on linux does. then when it's extracted onto
whatever platform, tar requests a symlink, and the platform takes care
of creating a platform specific symlink.

Rob


--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -