DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:subject
	:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
	 q=dns; s=default; b=ipoleviwn6+jMfGyBSx40d22Y0d3TJJrspq/8cZmNyQ
	zLnVUaVCAU8NIHs5Q3d+c/a6xAZGxZB305KytGFQvnBS7EMepgRBLrhYQcUTNO5U
	VsixsRMGoPznXoFUGnAPhFd46rj5tGjbF6drs0vOX/LEcme0/cKFKJyCD1sCRTWA
	=
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Message-ID: <5448F79A.6010900@towo.net>
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2014 14:42:02 +0200
From: Thomas Wolff <towo AT towo DOT net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: Problems on case-sensitive file systems
References: <54475648 DOT 3000805 AT towo DOT net> <20141022140031 DOT GD18857 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de>
In-Reply-To: <20141022140031.GD18857@calimero.vinschen.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Am 22.10.2014 16:00, schrieb Corinna Vinschen:
> On Oct 22 09:01, Thomas Wolff wrote:
>> I'm facing a number of issues with case-sensitivity which I've collected:
>>
>> There is a documented limitation on case-sensitivity using drive letter
>> paths,
>> also mentioned in https://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/2013-08/msg00090.html
>> (last item). I vaguely remember seeing a reason for this limitation in some
>> mail but can't find it again. I think it would be good to remove this
>> limitation because it breaks user expectations when working on
>> case-sensitive drives.
> The user expectation when using DOS paths is caseinsensitivity in the
> first place.  But, as usual, there's no way to do this right, since
> somebody will have another POV.  My stance is, don't use DOS paths when
> using Cygwin.  At leats don't use DOS paths if you have any expectations
> about special POSIX path handling on Cygwin.
I use an application that uses Windows or mixed paths, I cannot 
influence it. So while I understand your POV, it would still be helpful 
to have path interpretation fully-featured. (If you point me to a place 
in winsup, I might even try to do something myself.)

>> According to documentation, the posix mount flag is enforced to be the same
>> for all mounts below /cygdrive; is there a strong reason?
> Yes.  The flags are shared between all cygdrive paths.  If you need
> something else, don;'t use the cygdrive path, but another, manually
> added mount point.  Note that this:
>
>   none /cygdrive cygdrive binary,posix=0,user 0 0
>   D: /cygdrive/d ntfs binary,nouser,posix=1,noumount 0 0
>
> does NOT work.  The manual paths must not overlap with the cygdrive
> paths.
I know and I did use a different path (maybe too similar to get 
recognized...). But it does not seem to work properly:
I have now this in /etc/fstab:
C: /mnt/c ntfs binary,nouser,posix=1,noumount 0 0
T: /mnt/t smbfs binary,user,posix=1,noumount,auto 0 0
which has no effect at all. Neither are these mounts set automatically 
when starting cygwin, nor can I refer to them by 'mount /mnt/t' ("mount: 
can't find /mnt/t in /etc/fstab or in /etc/fstab.d/$USER") or 'mount -a' 
(no effect).
The only thing that works is manual mounting:
mount -o posix=1 C: /mnt/c
mount -o posix=1,exec T: /mnt/t
But: while case-sensitivity now works in /mnt/c, it still does not in 
/mnt/t.
As a minor side-effect, the mount points in /cygdrive of these two 
drives now disappear from the list shown by 'mount' although they are 
still available as duplicate mounts.
------
Thomas

--
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