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 X-Apparently-From: Message-ID: <3A96C959.ADC04E3@yahoo.com> Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 15:34:33 -0500 From: Earnie Boyd Reply-To: cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: John Paulson CC: cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT]: Important change to symbolic linkfunctionality References: <5 DOT 0 DOT 2 DOT 1 DOT 0 DOT 20010223120510 DOT 02408cf0 AT mailhost> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit John Paulson wrote: > > I like the proposal to unify Windows and Cygwin symlinks. However, one > minor problem can occur: under *nix I can have files with the extension > .lnk, with no special semantics associated with it. I can tar up a directory > containing .lnk files on my *nix box and untar them on my cygwin box. What > happens to those files with the .lnk extension? I think this will be another > bit of Windows-vs-the-world festivity (as occurred with one source tarball > recently which had a directory named "AUX"). > > Even with that potential hassle, unification is the correct choice. > Just for kicks, after reading this post, I did `touch foo.lnk' and have a circular reference to foo.lnk. The directory listing actually shows the filename as foo.lnk. I then decided to `cat << EOF > abc.lnk' and actually put data in the file. This time the listing doesn't show a circular reference and cat abc.lnk gives me the contents of the file. Earnie. _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com -- Want to unsubscribe from this list? Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple