X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Subject: RE: [Mingw-msys] POSIX names for drive letters Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2006 17:39:48 +0200 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: From: "Schwarz, Konrad" To: "MSYS Discussion List" Cc: Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: 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 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id k7UFe7Ze027690 > > > The proposed mapping for directory `C:\' is `//./C$/' (or perhaps > > > `//./C/'). > > > So... why exactly do you need this? The only thing I might actually > > support here (keeping in mind Eric's comments and CGF's clear > > agreement with them) would be treating '//./' as a special case of > > '//127.0.0.1/', at which point '//./C$/' is the UNC mapping of the > > default 'C$' share on the local machine. But I still fail > to see why > > that is useful. For the record, the //127.0.0.1/C$ solution is probably good enough for me. I therefore retract my proposal. By the way, any idea why //localhost/C$ doesn't work? Also, someone called Interix a POS, which I can't find on http://cygwin.com/acronyms, but I guess is derogatory (I originally though "POsix Simulation" or something, to tell the truth). Is there a list of reasons of the drawbacks of Interix somewhere? Regards, Konrad Schwarz -- 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/