Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@cygwin.com Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2005 15:20:00 +0200 From: Corinna Vinschen To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: Cygwin and NTFS Junction Points Message-ID: <20050804132000.GS14783@calimero.vinschen.de> Reply-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com References: <080320051737.1393.42F100EC00014F6E0000057122007358340A050E040D0C079D0A@comcast.net> <42F11228.2030305@air2web.com> <42F113B6.843BA07D@dessent.net> <20050803200818.GI14783@calimero.vinschen.de> <42F1F189.2090407@decodon.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <42F1F189.2090407@decodon.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2i On Aug 4 12:44, Frank-Michael Moser wrote: > Corinna, http://cygwin.com/acronyms/#TOFU reformatted. > Corinna Vinschen wrote: > > To me, junction points are more like mount points, > > not symlinks. Since mount points are transparent and don't act like > > symlinks to cp/mv/rm and friends, I won't opt for treating junctions as > > symlinks in the Cygwin DLL. > > > > At least not in the general case. In theory, we could implement it like > > this: If the target is a fs, treat the junction like a mount point (aka, > > transparently as a normal directory), otherwise, if the target is a > > directory, treat the junction as a symlink. > > > > However, this is complicated, time consuming and error prone. I can easily > > imagine that this behaviour results in a strange, unexpected behaviour for > > some people. > I understand your objections but I think this all could be seen from an > alternate point of view. > > As you said, JPs, as they are implemented, are less useful than real > POSIX symlinks. Now instead of miming Microsofts intention with the JPs, > why not simply considering them consequently as symlinks in Cygwin and > so making them really useful, at least for Cygwin users. This could be > competed by installing NTFSLink and so getting JPs consequently and > transparently handled as POSIX-like symlinks in Windows Explorer and > Cygwin and thus making them *very* useful finally. You don't want to have reparse points treated as symlinks all the time, do you? That just sounds plain wrong to me. As I wrote, it would be possible to treat them as symlinks, but that would neither make sense for mounted file systems, nor for the general case (e.g., for instance, non- Microsoft RPs). And then again, it's a lot of extra effort Cygwin has to go through. For example when a RP should be removed, a simple DeleteFile just doesn't work. Well, either case, http://cygwin.com/acronyms/#SHTDI. Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Project Co-Leader mailto:cygwin@cygwin.com Red Hat, Inc. -- 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/