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, 23 May 2001 22:37:32 -0400 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: CygWin file access puzzle Message-ID: <20010523223732.A30572@redhat.com> Reply-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.11i In-Reply-To: ; from karlm30@hotmail.com on Wed, May 23, 2001 at 07:14:16PM -0700 On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 07:14:16PM -0700, Karl M wrote: >Thanks, but now back to my question...in other installations on win2k >machines, things worked just fine if I did nothing to the cygwin >variable (just accepted the defaults). Later, when I set CYGWIN=tty >ntsec, then I got the added features. > >But now...I had this problem, and because of one of the replies I got, >I set the CYGWIN=tty ntsec ntea binmode title case_check:strict, as an >experiment. the ls command then worked correctly. > >So...I'm puzzled as to why this fixed it. If I was a betting man, I would be willing to be a large sum that the above didn't fix anything. The evidence points to another, non-cygwin version of ls on your computer. cgf -- Want to unsubscribe from this list? Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple