Message-ID: <49DD7CD1.6030302@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 09 Apr 2009 05:42:57 +0100
From: Dave Korn <dave.korn.cygwin@googlemail.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Subject: Re: duplicate *.exe commands
References: <20090409022312.19895.qmail@smasher.org> <49DD6D23.2080607@cygwin.com> <49DD78AC.6070203@gmail.com> <49DD76D8.1060703@cygwin.com>
In-Reply-To: <49DD76D8.1060703@cygwin.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com

Larry Hall (Cygwin) wrote:
> Dave Korn wrote:
>> Larry Hall (Cygwin) wrote:
>>> Now, to anticipate your next question, '/usr/bin/cat.exe' and
>>> '/bin/cat.exe' are not duplicates either.  See the results of typing
>>> 'mount'.
>>
>>   That was the exact opposite of what you meant to say, wasn't it? 
>> /usr/bin/*
>> and /bin/* absolutely are duplicates of each other, as you hoped to
>> point out
>> by showing them mounted to the same place.
> 
> I guess that depends on what you mean by "duplicates".

  Ah, I see your point.

>  I meant it as in
> one is not a copy of the other.  They are the same file as viewed from
> two different directory paths.  Delete one in one path and the other goes
> too.  A "duplicate" to me means that I could delete '/usr/bin/cat.exe', for
> example, and still have '/bin/cat.exe'.  This is not the case with Cygwin.
> Hopefully that clarifies things for everyone. :-)

  Yes, they are not so much "duplicates" as "aliases" of each other.

    cheers,
      DaveK


--
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/