Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 00:22:58 -0500
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: New symlinks
Message-ID: <20010227002258.A8991@redhat.com>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.11i

I've finally taken the time to play with the new symlinks.  I like them!

However, I noticed that when I do this:

ln -s bar foo
cat foo.lnk

I get the contents of bar.

Should I?  Or should I get a "file not found"?  Or should I get
the contents of foo?

This is somewhat analogous to cygwin's behavior with .exe in some
situations but I'm not sure that we should ever expose the fact that a
symlink now has a .lnk extension to the user.

Comments?

cgf

--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple