Mail Archives: cygwin/2005/07/22/16:31:41
On Fri, Jul 22, 2005 at 02:53:57PM -0400, Larry Hall wrote:
>At 02:42 PM 7/22/2005, you wrote:
>>Larry Hall wrote:
>>>I think it's fair to say that further discussion along the lines of
>>>whether Windows is smart or stupid to implement the hidden file
>>>semantics as it does is off-topic for this list. Any further comments
>>>along these lines should be taken to the cygwin-talk list (if they
>>>could conceivably be linked to Cygwin in some way) or a Windows forum.
>>
>>May we assume http://cygwin.com/acronyms/#PTC when it comes to fixing
>>Windows's smartness/stupidity in this area?
>>
>>Would such a patch be worth the effort to anyone?
>
>Sure. Patches are always thoughtfully considered. I would say that
>any such patch that someone develops should not have a negative impact
>on performance or add to the complexity of already complex code paths
>(i.e. path handling and conversion code). But if there's a good way
>to eliminate this hair-brained Windows restriction with Cygwin tools,
>then I'm sure any patch implementing it will be thoughtfully considered
>as well.
Right. What he said. The ideal patch would just add an additional flag
to an open call to bypass the strange hidden file behavior.
If the patch involves having to query every file before it's opened and
change its protection, however, then it's not likely that the patch
would be accepted.
cgf
--
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/
- Raw text -