Re: [PATCH 0/3] Add more winsymlinks values

[Christian Franke <Christian.Franke@t-online.de>]

Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Jul 19 17:31, Jon Turney wrote:
>> I'm not sure this is the best idea, since it adds more configurations that
>> aren't going to get tested often, but the idea is that this would enable
>> proper and consistent control of the symlink type used from setup, as
>> discussed in [1].
>>
>> [1] https://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin-apps/2021-May/041327.html
> Why isn't it sufficient to use 'winsymlinks:native' from setup?
>
> The way we express symlinks shouldn't be a user choice, really.  The
> winsymlinks thingy was only ever introduced in a desperate attempt to
> improve access to symlinks from native tools, and I still don't see a
> way around that.  But either way, what's the advantage in allowing the
> user complete control over the type, even if the type is only useful in
> Cygwin?
>

WSL compatible symlinks introduce several issues with non-Cygwin 
Copy/Archive/Backup tools (robocopy behaves strange, 7-Zip stores these 
as empty files, ...). If WSL itself is not used on a machine, there is 
possibly no benefit using such symlinks for Cygwin there.

I usually prefer the old "magic" cookie SYSTEM files, in particular on 
portable installs for "rescue" purposes. Patch 2/3 would allow to select 
these.

+1 from me for this enhancement.

Christian