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
Date:	Thu, 1 Mar 2001 22:30:40 -0500
From:	Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: New symlinks.
Message-ID:	<20010301223040.A7391@redhat.com>
Reply-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References:	<5 DOT 0 DOT 2 DOT 1 DOT 0 DOT 20010301173204 DOT 02448c90 AT mailhost> <3A9F0AA7 DOT 6AFCC739 AT yahoo DOT com> <5 DOT 0 DOT 2 DOT 1 DOT 0 DOT 20010301190322 DOT 0244d370 AT mailhost>
Mime-Version:	1.0
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.3.11i
In-Reply-To:	<5.0.2.1.0.20010301190322.0244d370@mailhost>; from munch@powertv.com on Thu, Mar 01, 2001 at 07:16:56PM -0800

On Thu, Mar 01, 2001 at 07:16:56PM -0800, John Paulson wrote:
>And when the partial paths _are_ followed, how will that interact with
>mount points?  If there is a "/c.lnk" file and I also have a mount for
>"/c", who wins?  During the expansion of the path, is the partially
>de-symlinked path looked up in mount table?  (Nitpicking is my life).

This isn't a new thing for path checking.  You have exactly the same
case with the old symlinks since /c doesn't necessarily have to exist
as a physical directory or file.

In any case, why are you asking questions rather than posting results?
This isn't theory we're discussing.  The DLL with these changes is
available for testing now.

cgf

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

- Raw text -