| delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
At 06:02 PM 9/29/2003, Matt Swift you wrote: >>> "L" == Larry wrote: > > L> 'ln' and 'mkshortcut' have different behavior for a reason. See > L> <http://cygwin.com/cygwin-ug-net/using-effectively.html#AEN1516>. > L> The difference is why 'mkshortcut' exists. Otherwise, we'd just have > L> 'ln' (which is all we had for quite some time until the need for > L> different behavior was realized). > > > >I had seen that discussion. I found no discussion of the particular >interaction of shortcuts/symlinks and the special handling of the .exe >extension. To predict the results of the commands I listed, I had to >experiment. > >Second, I still don't understand why `ln' shouldn't behave the way I >suggested: how is it better the way it is than if `ln -s' never >created broken shortcuts The documentation I directed you to explains why 'ln -s' functions as it does and from that follows the need for 'mkshortcut'. 'ln -s' doesn't create 'broken shortcuts'. It creates symbolic links with UNIX semantics. That's the goal. If you want/need a Windows-style shortcut with all the semantics that implies, use 'mkshortuct'. Is that the point you were missing? >and 'ln' (hardlink) defaulted to a target of >"foo.exe" when the supplied target "foo" doesn't exist? I'm inclined to agree on this. I think symmetry here would be a good thing. Still, I haven't done any real investigation of this issue so I was withholding any bold proclamation on it. I'm sure it fits into the category of <http://cygwin.com/acronyms/#PTC> if you're inclined to investigate further. -- Larry Hall http://www.rfk.com RFK Partners, Inc. (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office 838 Washington Street (508) 893-9889 - FAX Holliston, MA 01746 -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
| webmaster | delorie software privacy |
| Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |