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 Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2005 23:17:15 -0400 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: Path processing bug Message-ID: <20050822031715.GA17547@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com References: <20050822002413 DOT GE12465 AT trixie DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <20050822025905 DOT 7896213C83C AT cgf DOT cx> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050822025905.7896213C83C@cgf.cx> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i On Sun, Aug 21, 2005 at 09:58:40PM -0500, Gary R. Van Sickle wrote: >Cgf wrote: > >[snip] > >> I think it's a pretty hard problem and I really don't care >> about POSIX > >??? This must be a typo, or you wouldn't be here. You're right. It wasn't a typo but it was too strongly stated. I really don't care about POSIX in this case because I don't care about slavish adherence to POSIX standards at the expense of decreasing cygwin performance, adding a lot of complexity, or removing functionality. For example, I don't want to make Cygwin 1% slower so that a corner case problem like foo/../bar will work correctly and I don't want to remove functionality from 'tar' because the 't' option to fopen() isn't mentioned by POSIX. And, although I use SUSv3 as a reference, when I'm looking for compatibility, I really only care about how things work on linux. If there is a conflict between POSIX and linux, then linux wins, unless there is a really compelling case otherwise. Luckily, usually linux and SUSv3 agree. cgf -- 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/