X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-workers-bounces using -f
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 21:46:34 +0200
From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT elta DOT co DOT il>
Sender: halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il
To: "Tim Van Holder" <tim DOT van DOT holder AT pandora DOT be>
Message-Id: <9003-Mon08Sep2003214633+0300-eliz@elta.co.il>
X-Mailer: emacs 21.3.50 (via feedmail 8 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9
CC: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to: <20030908062733.EFF5790551@iceage.anubex.com>
	(tim DOT van DOT holder AT pandora DOT be)
Subject: Re: RESEND: Re: /dev/c - c: or c:/ ?
References:  <20030908062733 DOT EFF5790551 AT iceage DOT anubex DOT com>
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

> From: "Tim Van Holder" <tim DOT van DOT holder AT pandora DOT be>
> Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2003 08:27:28 +0200
> > 
> > I thought I explained that: because the OS we are running on isn't
> > Posix.
> 
> Neither is Win32 - but Win32+Cygwin is.

I don't see how this is relevant.  We all know that Cygwin's way has
its downsides.

> The point of absolute paths is that if you change the current directory,
> the path still refers to the same location.  This is only true for
> X:foo style paths if the current directory on X: remains unhanged.

It remains unchanged as long as you don't go to that drive.

Look, I don't think there's any point in arguing along these lines any
more.  I think I made my opinion clear; I also said I won't veto the
change suggested by Rich.  You don't need to convert me, or even try.
If there's no specific problems with the current support of c:, let's
just quit this thread, okay?