Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 10:46:36 -0500 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: /bin/pwd versus built-in pwd Message-ID: <20010127104636.A31021@redhat.com> Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com References: <3A64D197 DOT 514DD0FA AT veritas DOT com> <200101172009 DOT WAA11316 AT linux.> <20010117154318 DOT D14952 AT redhat DOT com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.11i In-Reply-To: <20010117154318.D14952@redhat.com>; from cgf@redhat.com on Wed, Jan 17, 2001 at 03:43:18PM -0500 On Wed, Jan 17, 2001 at 03:43:18PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote: >On Wed, Jan 17, 2001 at 10:09:06PM +0200, Ehud Karni wrote: >>On Tue, 16 Jan 2001 14:56:23 -0800, Bob McGowan wrote: >>> >>> "...That is, all components of the printed name will be actual >>> directory names -- none will be symbolic links." >>> >>> I'd say this is a bug. >> >>Despite what Christopher Faylor thinks, I'll say it >>is a real bug with critical implications. > >Huh? I never said it wasn't a bug. Quite the contrary. > >I suggested that people read the email archives. Look for "pwd symlink". I've checked in a fix for this. It will be in cygwin 1.1.8. cgf -- Want to unsubscribe from this list? Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple