Mail Archives: cygwin/2001/02/27/12:28:19
On Tue, Feb 27, 2001 at 05:17:30PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>On Tue, Feb 27, 2001 at 10:40:26AM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> I *really* don't think that the .lnk extension should show up when
>> doing an "ls -l" as was suggested in another post. That is just an
>> open invitation to increasing mailing list traffic: "How do I get rid
>> of the .lnk extension when I create symlinks???? It doesn't do this
>> on Linux."
>>
>> I am, as always, more concerned about supporting this feature in
>> the long run. If allowing foo.lnk to be referenced explicitly causes
>> even one person confusion, I don't think that it is worth it. It
>> is certainly non-UNIX behavior.
>
>I think it's correct behaviour. Cygwin doesn't show the .lnk
>suffix by itself but nevertheless, to return a `file not found'
>on `ls foo.lnk' wouldn't be correct. It's simply the truth:
>The file `foo.lnk' exists and is a symlink.
Again, it is surprising behavior. Such a file would not exist on UNIX.
I personally think that we should hide implementation details like
"Oh yeah, we added a .lnk extension to all of our symbolic links"
from the user. There is no reason for them to know or care about
this detail.
cgf
--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
- Raw text -