Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Message-ID: <005301c32b90$73d4b270$78d96f83@pomello>
From: "Max Bowsher" <maxb AT ukf DOT net>
To: <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
References: <bbl3cu$ph4$1 AT main DOT gmane DOT org> <NCBBIHCHBLCMLBLOBONKKELPEDAA DOT g DOT r DOT vansickle AT worldnet DOT att DOT net> <20030605160847 DOT GZ875 AT cygbert DOT vinschen DOT de> <006901c32b7f$0d7cceb0$78d96f83 AT pomello> <20030605164123 DOT GB875 AT cygbert DOT vinschen DOT de> <00c701c32b84$6632f980$78d96f83 AT pomello> <20030605174228 DOT GF11499 AT redhat DOT com>
Subject: Re: Sparse file criteria malfunction - binutils produces sparse .exe & .dll files
Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2003 19:29:51 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
X-Cam-ScannerAdmin: mail-scanner-support AT ucs DOT cam DOT ac DOT uk
X-Cam-AntiVirus: Not scanned
X-Cam-SpamDetails: 

Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 05, 2003 at 06:03:34PM +0100, Max Bowsher wrote:
>> Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jun 05, 2003 at 05:25:18PM +0100, Max Bowsher wrote:
>>>> I threw together a horrible C program to ask Windows whether a file was
>>>> sparse. .exe and .dll files made with a 1.5.0 Cygwin are. I haven't
posted
>>>> the test program, because it is too messy.
>>>> [...]
>>>> I give proof that dll/exe files are being created sparse above.
>>>
>>> Uhm...
>>
>> I like to think that I'm sufficiently trustworthy not to lie about a
clear
>> yes/no fact.
>
> If you can't back up your conclusions with actual code why should we
> assume that you are infallible?  No one is that trustworthy.

I assumed you would trust someone telling you whether the read-only
attribute of a file was set, without needing to see further evidence? To me,
this is an equivalent situation.

>> Personally I think "Don't risk anything if there is no potential gain" is
>> reasonably persuasive.
>
> Lets use the popular reasoning here.  If there was no potential gain
> then Microsoft would not have provided the option, would they?  Since
> they did there has to be *some* potential gain.

But their option isn't on by default. So, presumably, there must be some
circumstances when it is undesirable.

> Thanks for not mentioning that you think a CYGWIN environment variable
> option is the way to go for this.  I guess we're making minor progress
> now.

I would still like some mechanism to force sparse file creation off, but
since that seems unlikely to happen, I guess I will try to think of a way to
improve the heuristic for deciding whether to make files sparse.

Max.


--
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/