Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 16:20:14 +0300 (IDT)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender: eliz AT is
To: Teun Burgers <burgers AT ecn DOT nl>
cc: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: symlink() & is_v2_prog() question
In-Reply-To: <37CBBC80.C813B8BC@ecn.nl>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.990831161837.8097A-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk


On Tue, 31 Aug 1999, Teun Burgers wrote:

> !<symlink>x1/x2
> 
> How about being trying to be consistent with cygwin
> in this respect?

Compatibility is probably a goods idea.

Is there a document somewhere that describes how symlinks are simulated 
by Cygwin?  (I'm afraid of some hidden features that the above short 
description doesn't reveal.)