Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 19:26:27 +0200 (IST)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender: eliz AT is
To: Charles Sandmann <sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu>
cc: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: DJGPP 2.04 status page updates: more to-dos, priorities
In-Reply-To: <10212121547.AA14052@clio.rice.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1021212192459.24935B-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
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


On Thu, 12 Dec 2002, Charles Sandmann wrote:

> Why don't we switch to the new format?  It says it's Win compatible
> on windows systems (.lnk)

The current format in DJGPP was selected to not cause any expensive I/O 
operations in standard functions like `stat' and the likes.  That's why 
the symlink file has a fixed length.  Is the new Cygwin format compatible 
with that, i.e. does it create fixed-size files?