X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date
	:message-id:subject:to:content-type; q=dns; s=default; b=XdlTX5k
	0H6l0aszTT6MQHZMIWHSRIuiaC/n3YbPZ5bdHw4u8qf9ej+hpXolpeVJfu8atvaH
	76qURycAlfUC+BT32IXVR60/PKuxnAXOAOQwwrvsQ2V+vcSrAhBIaXM1BIRtJefh
	88Gt5bXu3EJzTd25Yj/H3KZvCSUg/k2UcdQE=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date
	:message-id:subject:to:content-type; s=default; bh=Tar8PQ6MiRCdP
	Fj4e2ib+oz0mw4=; b=lkU0OEBsv7t88ACVe31c9MemEG9XHjgEgihZh+cJ26Cgw
	LTAldcIY5xuFLLZO3o/4OSGfVfRY52H2FYNHHrD6JkRMRblyamWyed/Wn/XDqyXn
	tCkSG6MLqPR1P0A8eTp1IYsZp2G7OYFBzlm8538SU2Kk8SGPY50nX3YtO8cyHM=
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.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
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=
X-HELO: mail-it0-f53.google.com
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;        d=1e100.net; s=20161025;        h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date         :message-id:subject:to;        bh=EVmlDYNvsrhKHYFFTCmJpEVxczoShTKzbSA9JteJjaw=;        b=GFPPBIwSVgdPgUGwr/UVRedSziSOidTuqPtygsQVQ5DsE3jrxvS2JDDxJVV7yzOaGO         +ZWiZTI1Xw4Y2BGm0gEOPe9P0QzmcZWV8TRsyyp+BzNWZ/gvQC8UT/Ibo5GR+T5tJA28         DxCiLF2RXRwWISyNtZWa2T3Cvt8rsBmlUH2IjrVNe8GKRMqzTISJ8NRp6KhPgEUBPnfr         vL6RebikoFce1q9wGY6DZMhZCpytEcuHjz2HRTqvmdHSLVGWkg1I7SC5jvE56EtR07E+         f4TLjGDO5fs9HFRvfL2VunGT+bTH8URt9D1nBHJR1XTiLhQnFy0m+DMlRyc5KxGZd71O         HPrA==
X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E0wucEfdipwW/Zefw30STh/3O7FBnrx5yyGWQu2OOdX7m03XsFX	LZkufgQ/XGG4kM/vbLMJoo3cuHrfgx7pLbLH9Ek=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKI1ZV9kU1KeP4RlZxFcAb+sai35AA4kMMxOsWaVHqCgXk9HCvRUmtisCdyyVPFbcoekiHyV/Jq9tZhxzD8AkHM=
X-Received: by 2002:a24:684d:: with SMTP id v74-v6mr1532837itb.88.1528826537608; Tue, 12 Jun 2018 11:02:17 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <trinity-2aa37c55-032a-4631-9d8f-657ecd85e170-1528809265158@3c-app-gmx-bs08>
References: <trinity-82173dac-d842-4a87-8d1f-bed9a958d178-1528793630066 AT 3c-app-gmx-bs08> <dc8418d2-2004-97f0-2d8c-ab438f007eba AT redhat DOT com> <trinity-2aa37c55-032a-4631-9d8f-657ecd85e170-1528809265158 AT 3c-app-gmx-bs08>
From: Lee <ler762 AT gmail DOT com>
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 14:02:16 -0400
Message-ID: <CAD8GWssVFrh_GkLy80CfjDuwMTAS03V+qijzVZcX0Eh7df9VTw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Re: Problematic interpretion of paths starting with double slashes
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-IsSubscribed: yes

On 6/12/18, Sven Eden  wrote:
>> Gesendet: Dienstag, 12. Juni 2018 um 13:52 Uhr Von: "Eric Blake"
>> Then fix your script to provide 3 slashes instead of 2. Only 2 slashes
>> has the magic UNC behavior.
>
> It is not my script. *my* scripts are portable by all means.
>
>> That is, if you have a script that is concatenating:
>>
>> ${prefix}/${dir}
>>
>> where ${prefix} might be empty, you can always rewrite it to be:
>>
>> ${prefix}///${dir}
>
> The script was "fixed" from ${prefix}/${dir} a while ago.
> Before that the outcome was "///".
>
> Which is very bad style.

but it was portable

> Good style is to guarantee, that
> not more than one slash is issued.

Why don't you submit a patch to guarantee that not more than one slash
is issued?
Or submit a bug report that the earlier patch broke portability?

Asking cygwin to change their long standing, posix allowed,
implementation defined behavior seems like the least likely way to get
the problem fixed.

Regards,
Lee

--
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