Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@sourceware.cygnus.com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@sources.redhat.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@sources.redhat.com Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 13:52:44 +0100 From: Corinna Vinschen To: Cygwin Subject: Re: New symlinks. Message-ID: <20010228135244.I8464@cygbert.vinschen.de> Mail-Followup-To: Cygwin References: <17B78BDF120BD411B70100500422FC6309E21C@IIS000> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <17B78BDF120BD411B70100500422FC6309E21C@IIS000>; from Dautrevaux@microprocess.com on Wed, Feb 28, 2001 at 11:41:56AM +0100 On Wed, Feb 28, 2001 at 11:41:56AM +0100, Bernard Dautrevaux wrote: > > If "foo.lnk" is a valid shortcut, then I would say the real > > file "foo" should win. That is, the shortcut would be invisible. > > That is IMHO the only consistent behaviour; together with cygwin refusing to > create a link named foo (that is a WinFile named foo.lnk) if foo already > exists (sorry Corinna, it's perhaps already done this way but I can't > check). Cygwin should also refuse creating a file named foo if a link named > foo (that is a WinFile named foo.lnk which is a valid shortcut) already > exist. Yup. Both is handled that way. > another icon ;^). Don't underestimate people using Windows; most of them are > not idiots and are used to Windows idiosyncrasisms, so when using cygwin > they can adapt :-) I wonder... *restrain sarcasm* ...anyway, you may be right here ;-) Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Developer mailto:cygwin@cygwin.com Red Hat, Inc. -- Want to unsubscribe from this list? Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple