From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mailout04.t-online.de (mailout04.t-online.de [194.25.134.18]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C1C19385BF83 for ; Wed, 21 Jul 2021 10:24:16 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org C1C19385BF83 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=t-online.de Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=t-online.de Received: from fwd28.aul.t-online.de (fwd28.aul.t-online.de [172.20.26.133]) by mailout04.t-online.de (Postfix) with SMTP id 44D2D3D68B for ; Wed, 21 Jul 2021 12:24:15 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [192.168.2.105] (XGZkIMZEghy+BvFYP6ZBxrRqGmCV0FXgYeuyOxCj+rfKaQfMmD7txcmUki0COCbwlx@[79.230.169.184]) by fwd28.t-online.de with (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) esmtp id 1m69Og-0Ymga00; Wed, 21 Jul 2021 12:24:14 +0200 Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Add more winsymlinks values To: cygwin-patches@cygwin.com References: <20210719163134.9230-1-jon.turney@dronecode.org.uk> From: Christian Franke Message-ID: <616f5f9b-83e2-689c-bda3-dddc50dff5f0@t-online.de> Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2021 12:24:13 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 SeaMonkey/2.53.7.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ID: XGZkIMZEghy+BvFYP6ZBxrRqGmCV0FXgYeuyOxCj+rfKaQfMmD7txcmUki0COCbwlx X-TOI-EXPURGATEID: 150726::1626863054-0000EDA1-F2A6F467/0/0 CLEAN NORMAL X-TOI-MSGID: 12ed77b0-4c40-4a95-a9b7-b0d95477f338 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, FREEMAIL_FROM, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY, NICE_REPLY_A, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_NONE, TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: cygwin-patches@cygwin.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Cygwin core component patch submission and discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2021 10:24:18 -0000 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