X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <4EE90067 DOT 9020109 AT bopp DOT net> <0105D5C1E0353146B1B222348B0411A20A43E78632 AT NIHMLBX02 DOT nih DOT gov> <4EEABDB8 DOT 4020307 AT cygwin DOT com> Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 11:46:45 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Symlinks and sharing a home directory between Windows and Linux From: Jon Clugston To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: 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 pBGGl99d031168 On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 11:20 AM, Andrew DeFaria wrote: > On 12/15/2011 07:40 PM, Larry Hall (Cygwin) wrote: >> >> I'm having difficulty seeing how what you have described could work unless >> the consumers of these files are looking for symlinks only, which your >> example above contradicts.  And both of the ".bashrc" files are registering >> as plain files, so I think you're right that the file system on which they >> reside is coming into play, assuming the output above is from Cygwin's 'ls'. >>  But even if you had ".bashrc" and ".bashrc.lnk" with the former being a >> UNIX-form of symlink and the latter being the Cygwin one, I'd still expect >> Cygwin to recognize ".bashrc" first and only go looking for the .lnk version >> if it couldn't find that. > > I would think that Cygwin should see the .lnk version first. No? I guess > not. I thought it worked that way before. This would be a performance disaster - forcing a check for 'x.lnk' every time the software tried to access file 'x'. I doubt that it worked that way before. >> >> The output of strace may convince you of that as well. ;-)  It might >> actually work as you describe it though if >> you can get Cygwin to think that it can't open the former.  I could see >> that being the case if the UNIX symlink was created by a user ID Cygwin >> didn't recognize, for example. > > I've backed off to using hardlinks which work on both systems but it doesn't > work for directories. > -- > Andrew DeFaria > Accept that some days you're the pigeon, and some days you're the statue. > > > -- > Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html > FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/ > Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html > Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple > -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple