Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 10:52:31 +0200
From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Sender: halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il
To: lauras AT softhome DOT net
Message-Id: <3405-Fri25Aug2000105230+0300-eliz@is.elta.co.il>
X-Mailer: Emacs 20.6 (via feedmail 8.2.emacs20_6 I) and Blat ver 1.8.5b
CC: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to: <39A577FD.834F90D1@softhome.net> (message from Laurynas Biveinis
	on Thu, 24 Aug 2000 21:31:09 +0200)
Subject: Re: Update __solve_dir_symlinks() patch
References:  <39A577FD DOT 834F90D1 AT softhome DOT net>
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

> Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 21:31:09 +0200
> From: Laurynas Biveinis <lauras AT softhome DOT net>
> 
> It solves drive letter handling issues pointed out by Eli. Also 
> there are related testsuite additions.

Looks okay (inspection only), but I wonder whether the recursive
invocation of basename is such a good idea.  Imagine an argument such
as "c:/foo///////////////////////////////////////////////////////".
(Yes, I know: it's sick ;-)

Also, what about file names such as /dev/env/FOO or /dev/c/foo?  Does
this code DTRT for them?  It looks like it depends what does
__solve_symlinks does for these names.

I suggest to add the "/dev/..." names to the test suite.