Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-apps-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-apps-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-apps-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/lists.html#faqs>
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2001 23:53:49 -0500
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: symlinks
Message-ID: <20011111045349.GA22654@redhat.com>
Reply-To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
References: <EA18B9FA0FE4194AA2B4CDB91F73C0EF08F28B AT itdomain002 DOT itdomain DOT net DOT au> <3BEDFE95 DOT 3000200 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu> <20011111043838 DOT GA22496 AT redhat DOT com> <014001c16a6b$9e42fe00$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <014001c16a6b$9e42fe00$0200a8c0@lifelesswks>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23.1i

On Sun, Nov 11, 2001 at 03:44:57PM +1100, Robert Collins wrote:
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Christopher Faylor" <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
>
>> I don't anticipate that they will ever go away, so I think we should
>stick
>> with having setup.exe create the "old style" method.  It will keep the
>> code size down in setup.exe.
>
>Actually it won't - we already create .lnk files for the start menu. (It
>was aiming to reduce that overhead that caused my question.

AFAIK, it isn't creating cygwin links.  It's creating Windows lnk files,
isn't it?

>>Or, maybe this will become a non-issue when/if setup.exe is split in
>>two since we'll be able to use cygwin tar at that point.  >
>
>Not really, because the inital bootstrap may well have shortcuts in it.

If you say so.  I don't see why it would.  That would seem to be counter
to the reason for splitting up setup.exe.  I thought that you'd want
to have all of the cygwin intelligence in the second half.

So, I guess I don't have an opinion on this.  I should point out that
the "new" links will actually work better on remote shares so maybe
that's enough of an argument for them.

I'd like to get Corinna's opinion on this, though.

cgf