X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Message-ID: <c5df85930708271531h17dd481cqf65894ac05c01000@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 23:31:00 +0100
From: "James Youngman" <jay AT gnu DOT org>
To: "Eric Blake" <ebb9 AT byu DOT net>
Subject: Re: cygwin coreutils-6.9-5
Cc: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com, bug-coreutils <bug-coreutils AT gnu DOT org>
In-Reply-To: <46CC3040.2000908@byu.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <announce DOT 46CB5508 DOT 9020809 AT byu DOT net> <46CB58A1 DOT 3040202 AT x-ray DOT at> 	 <46CB5D57 DOT 5080401 AT byu DOT net> 	 <20070822083015 DOT GA13475 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> 	 <46CC3040 DOT 2000908 AT byu DOT net>
X-Google-Sender-Auth: 2e5ce1552f0e1a06
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 8/22/07, Eric Blake <ebb9 AT byu DOT net> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Forwarding this conversation from the cygwin lists, as it provides some
> useful information on the recent topic of case insensitivity.
>
> According to Corinna Vinschen on 8/22/2007 2:30 AM:

> > So we're back to fpathconf(_PC_CASE_INSENSITIVE): It appears that
> > case-insensitive operation on the POSIX application level depends on
> > such a flag.  I'm also planning to allow case-sensitive operation on
> > NTFS in Cygwin at one point, which would make this flag necessary as
> > well.  I don't think it would ever become part of the POSIX standard,
> > though.
>
> If _PC_CASE_INSENSITIVE ever did get standardized, it would be merely to
> guarantee existence of the flag, with the caveat that in POSIX it always
> returns false.  But since POSIX does allow implementations to add _PC_*
> flags to pathconf as extensions, I see no harm in implementing it even
> without specification.

If applications are supposed to be able to use _PC_CASE_INSENSITIVE to
figure out if rename("a","A") should be a no-op, then there is an
assumption that the kernel and the userspace have identical ideas
about case conversion (that is whether the source and destination file
names differ only by case).   I'm not sure how that could happen.

James.

--
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/