Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: Bug: link.exe Mail-Copies-To: never Reply-To: sds AT gnu DOT org X-Attribution: Sam X-Disclaimer: You should not expect anyone to agree with me. From: Sam Steingold In-Reply-To: <20041223093516.GB317@cygbert.vinschen.de> (Corinna Vinschen's message of "Thu, 23 Dec 2004 10:35:16 +0100") References: <41C9ED30 DOT 6000709 AT xilinx DOT com> <20041223093516 DOT GB317 AT cygbert DOT vinschen DOT de> Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2005 17:17:35 -0500 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/21.3.50 (windows-nt) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain > * Corinna Vinschen [2004-12-23 10:35:16 +0100]: > >> My temporary fix for my developers is to remove coreutils `link' from >> our systems, that's what I had to do too. >> but if it is reinstalled every time coreutils is >> upgraded, this will cause an ongoing problem. indeed. moving the woe32 directory forward in PATH appears to be the only "solution" (you never know what important unix commands will be shadowed) > The link tool is installed by default on Linux as well. what does it do that ln(1) does not? alas, both ln(1) and link(1) are in SUS, http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/utilities/ln.html http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/utilities/link.html so we are stuck here. > I guess you read my announcement? the announcement did not mention link(1). or you mean that you are willing to surrender maintainership? Thanks. -- Sam Steingold (http://www.podval.org/~sds) running w2k Those who can't write, write manuals. -- 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/