X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org From: Eli Zaretskii To: cygwin@cygwin.com In-reply-to: <20060817120923.GF20467@calimero.vinschen.de> (message from Corinna Vinschen on Thu, 17 Aug 2006 14:09:23 +0200) Subject: Re: change in behavior of make from 3.80 to 3.81 Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <6.2.3.4.2.20060816091525.0ab90af0@pop.nycap.rr.com> <20060816144110.GX20467@calimero.vinschen.de> <6.2.3.4.2.20060816111421.0b446b60@pop.nycap.rr.com> <20060816155054.GY20467@calimero.vinschen.de> <6.2.3.4.2.20060816144036.09695af0@pop.nycap.rr.com> <20060817093551.GD20467@calimero.vinschen.de> <20060817120923.GF20467@calimero.vinschen.de> Message-Id: Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2006 09:30:10 -0400 Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: 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, 17 Aug 2006 14:09:23 +0200 > > On Aug 17 05:46, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > > Windows doesn't allow colons anywhere else in file names anyway. > > > > > > That's not quite right. Colons are also used in file names when the > > > file name denotes an alternative named stream on NTFS file systems. > > > > Right, I forgot about this obscure feature. > > > > However, this feature is not specific to Cygwin, so if support for > > such names is important (I suspect it isn't, but that's me), GNU Make > > should be modified to support them in all Windows ports; any solution > > that is good for other Windows ports will be good for Cygwin, and vice > > versa. Do you agree? > > Hmm, no, sorry. I can't agree to "any solution that is good for other > Windows ports will be good for Cygwin". This should be decided on a > case by case basis. Of course! I was talking only about _this_specific_case_, i.e. the support for ADS. I was saying that, if we need to support it, the same support will work well for all Windows ports. > Colons are only a problem in the TARGETS and PREREQUISITES part of a > make rule, not in the COMMAND part. But it only makes marginal sense to > use the ADS name for dependency checks, because a file has only one set > of timestamps for the whole file, not multiple timestamps, one per data > stream. The availablilty on only one filesystem type restricts the > usefulness further. So the ability to use ADS names in the COMMAND part > of a rule should be sufficient. Agreed. -- 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/