Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-developers-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-developers/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-developers-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 00:59:27 -0400
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: difficult problem with symbolic link handling
Message-ID: <20010430005927.A27801@redhat.com>
Reply-To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
References: <20010428130748 DOT A20706 AT redhat DOT com> <s1sd79vo68c DOT fsf AT jaist DOT ac DOT jp> <20010429203818 DOT A24401 AT redhat DOT com> <20010429215014 DOT A24953 AT redhat DOT com> <s1sbspfngr0 DOT fsf AT jaist DOT ac DOT jp>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.11i
In-Reply-To: <s1sbspfngr0.fsf@jaist.ac.jp>; from fujieda@jaist.ac.jp on Mon, Apr 30, 2001 at 01:39:15PM +0900

On Mon, Apr 30, 2001 at 01:39:15PM +0900, Kazuhiro Fujieda wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 29 Apr 2001 21:50:14 -0400
>>>> Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com> said:
>
>> I'd still like to have someone pick some holes in my current way of
>> doing things.  I've still got this feeling that I missed something
>> important.
>
>The `cygpath' utility returns results quite different from ones
>in the previous way. Please see the following example.
>
>The previous way
>    $ pwd
>    /
>    $ cygpath -w usr/
>    usr\
>    $

This is probably due to the fact that I (temporarily?) eliminated relative
path translation in path_conv.

This is arguably a bug but it is not really related to the implementation.

When I talk about "the current way of doing things" I don't mean the
code.  I mean the idea behind the change.

I can fix coding problems.  I can't fix fundamental design flaws.

I was hoping that people would analyze the description that I had posted.
So far you and Corinna have found bugs in the implementation.  That is
valuable if this is a technique that we want to keep but if isn't then...

cgf