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 Message-Id: <4.3.1.2.20010926113933.024717e0@pop.ma.ultranet.com> X-Sender: lhall AT pop DOT ma DOT ultranet DOT com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1 Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2001 11:57:09 -0400 To: "Keith Starsmeare" , From: "Larry Hall (RFK Partners, Inc)" Subject: Re: //c - Ouch! In-Reply-To: <000401c146a0$bf6714c0$5d754789@edinstonehaven> References: <4 DOT 3 DOT 1 DOT 2 DOT 20010926104927 DOT 016fb790 AT pop DOT ma DOT ultranet DOT com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 11:34 AM 9/26/2001, Keith Starsmeare wrote: > > The problems you state are exactly the reasons for removing this syntax > > for accessing drives. It's too dangerous and problematic. > >As cgf was saying the other day, small incremental changes are often more >acceptable in open source projects. Maybe the cygwin dll should have gone >through a six month period whereby //c was broken completely and then >repaired to recognise UNC paths rather than local drives. > >I do know that the //c provided such a useful way to describe a local drive >without referring to back slashes that it has been incorporated into other >Windows based products (some Analog Devices command line tools for example). > >It's just that the implications will effect a lot of users and the release >note (http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-announce/2001/msg00112.html) has it >mentioned as the fifth item under "User level change overview". > >I'm sorry to stir this up again, but I think this needs to be in big bold >flashing letters! Everyone's entitled to an opinion. ;-) I'm not suggesting that your idea is bad. Indeed, it certainly does have merits. However, like you, I wouldn't know where to put this so that it would address the need. There's so many ways to access the software that any one place is probably not good enough. I may be pessimistic about this but my guess is no matter what might be done, queries about this change will still come to this list, despite the fact that the syntax has been deprecated for at least a year and warnings about its usage have been common on this list. Practically, as with most issues like this, any solution requires doing though. Also, I will say that I don't recall a single query on this list since the change that has indicated this is a major problem. Everyone seems to be taking it in stride. Some even preface their remarks with something like "I should've known better, given all the previous warnings about this syntax". You had something similar but with a different point. I'm sure now that I've given my impression of the relative ease with which this change has been accepted, we'll hear from allot of people explaining their resulting pain! ;-) In any case, I encourage you to follow-up on your concerns with some ideas that you would like to propose and put into action. I'm sure the list will provide feedback on them either before or after you provide them. Maybe even both! ;-) Just my $.02. Larry Hall lhall AT rfk DOT com RFK Partners, Inc. http://www.rfk.com 118 Washington Street (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office Holliston, MA 01746 (508) 893-9889 - FAX -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/