Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 09:30:30 +0200 From: Corinna Vinschen To: cygdev Subject: [RFD]: Should Cygwin use the old symlink style as default again? Message-ID: <20010530093030.C23313@cygbert.vinschen.de> Reply-To: cygdev Mail-Followup-To: cygdev Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i Hi, after several weeks of the community testing the new .lnk symlink style, it turns out that this constitutes some new problems I wasn't aware when creating it. Keep in mind that the advantage of using shortcuts as symlinks are not on Cygwin side but on native Windows side. While Cygwin always had symlinks and could use them (mostly) without problems, we had several times request of the type "why are Cygwin symlinks not usable in Explorer?" etc. The .lnk method just adds the ability of native Windows to utilize Cygwin symlinks for it's own dubious purposes... Cygwin can read native Windows shortcuts as well but it can only read and use the target information in the shortcut, nothing else. What are the problems now? The most important point is that Windows shortcuts contain more information than just a path to a target. They may contain an icon information, a description, a shortcut key and last but not least command line arguments for a target application. If these shortcuts are treated as symlinks, these information is lost when creating for example a tar archive containing these files. Since they are treated as symlinks, they are recreated as Cygwin symlinks when unpacking the tar archive... so all information except for the bare target is lost. As a result, it's impossible to create tar backups of, say, your profile directory. For that reason I have patched the shortcut code in the current CVS version so that only Cygwin (and U/WIN) shortcuts are treated as symlinks, while native shortcuts are treated as plain files again. The next disadvantage is that the evaluation of .lnk symlinks is more time consuming than the evaluation of old style symlinks. Since it's impossible to keep .lnk symlinks as a general solution but only for Cygwin symlinks, it seems a bit senseless to keep this method for the future except for the very first point, "native Windows can use Cygwin symlinks as well". We don't want to drop the shortcut method completely for backward compatibility reasons but the question is: Shall we return to the old symlink style as default? Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Developer mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat, Inc.