X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2007 10:40:16 +0200
From: Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: links
Message-ID: <20070802084016.GR13674@calimero.vinschen.de>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <20070731213343 DOT 3444 AT blackhawk> <20070731125915 DOT GA21952 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <20070802172219 DOT 1708 AT blackhawk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20070802172219.1708@blackhawk>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/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

On Aug  2 17:22, wynfield wrote:
> Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > You probably removed the R/O attribute from the .lnk files.  It's
> > essential for shortcats to be recognized as Cygwin symlinks.  Try
> > something along the lines of
> 
> What is the "R/O" attribute.

Ever heard about DOS attributes?  READONLY, SYSTEM, HIDDEN, etc.

> Are you saying that these new fangled so called cygwin symbolic links, that is files with 32, 64 bytes or whatever in them are "cygwin" specific and not portable.

They are new since 2001.  Dunno how long you're using Cygwin.

> For example I can run a --> link from a dos window with no problem, etc,..

Sure.  the created symlink is a .lnk file by default since at least 2002.

> An explanation of why this ".lnk" ism came into being.   

People asked for it for interoperability with Windows Explorer.  U/WIN
uses them, too.

> I, as I user do not think its justified, but somebody had the idea and sold it, but apparently, we, users were not informed or asked about it.  

Did you read this list around 2001?  Additionally, there's a really
new concept called "doc-u-men-tation" or something.  See
http://cygwin.com/cygwin-ug-net/using-cygwinenv.html, the option
called "(no)winsymlinks".

> I has also broke other programs that ran fine with, well symbolic limks.  The kind we are used to and do not need ".lnk" extensions for.

There are two of them, one kind with the SYSTEM attribute set, another
one which are Windows shortcuts (with .lnk suffix) and R/O DOS attribute
set.  The SYSTEM type was the only one until 2001, default until 2002,
and still produced by setup.exe.  The Windows shortcut type is created
by Cygwin since 2001 and default since 2002.

The R/O attribute is necessary to recognize .lnk files as Cygwin
symlinks.  This is a measure for speed.  Testing the attribute is much
faster than opeing the file and reading it all the time.

> P.s. should not need all that nonsense below..    And sorry to say I
> am not familiar with this r attribute, except as a read(r)permission.
> Is the group intentionally trying to be obtuse?

Ok, so you're using a Windows machine and never heard about DOS
attributes.  Apparently you also had a bad start in the day today.
Is that a good enough reason to be offensive?


Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader          cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat

--
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/