Mail Archives: cygwin/2009/11/16/07:32:53
Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Nov 16 12:56, Thomas Wolff wrote:
>
>> Andy Koppe wrote:
>>
>>> I'd suspect the support for ADSs in 1.5 was rather accidental anyway.
>>> POSIX programs certainly don't know about them, and you get the rather
>>> weird situation that "files" like foo:bar can be accessed but don't
>>> show up in the directory they're in. Hence I think the right way to
>>> access ADSs is via Windows tools. Unless there is a POSIXy way to
>>> represent them?
>>>
>> I've only learned about this ADS stuff recently but yes, I think,
>> simply using the "a:b" syntax (which is also used by Windows tools)
>> and handling them as a virtual file is a quite obvious POSIX way to
>> do it.
>> So if it worked in 1.5, whether accidental or not, I think it should
>> continue to work in 1.7.
>>
>
> It's a deliberate change. It's more important to support as much POSIXy
> filenames as possible than to access streams. I agree with Andy. Use
> Windows tools to use them.
>
But with it being supported, "foo:bar" *is* a POSIX filename and can
quite transparently be handled like a file, just that the underlying
filesystem in some cases (i.e. if it is NTFS) maps it to a fork of some
other file. So in practice, it *is* actually a file too, despite the
fact that MS uses weird terminology and inconsistent tooling for it.
And since I read that the use cases for ADS may increase with future
Windows versions, I just thought it should be a good idea not to ignore
these files.
Moreover, this transparent mapping would also solve the copy/backup
problem discussed in the other thread (was it "rsync"?) and actually all
problems at once, like including these things in zip archives etc.
Thomas
--
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
- Raw text -