* UNC Pathname Handling within Applications @ 2004-07-15 4:15 Thorsten Haude 2004-07-15 4:48 ` Christopher Faylor 2004-07-15 22:58 ` Shankar Unni 0 siblings, 2 replies; 26+ messages in thread From: Thorsten Haude @ 2004-07-15 4:15 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Cygwin ML [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1417 bytes --] Hi, I'm trying to find the best approach to solve a bug reported against NEdit: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=873188&group_id=11005&atid=111005 The reporter complains that NEdit cannot open files from network shares using Cygwin's double-slash notation. That is not suprising, since NEdit silently drops any doubled slash before using the path. I know that NEdit is not the only application ignoring multiplied slashes, so I wonder how this is normally handled with Cygwin. Indeed, a simple test on Linux seems to indicate that fopen() accepts any number of slashes, so this is not isolated to NEdit. - The user guide ("Mapping path names") does tell me something about what's to expect but little about implementation. - Googling brought me zilch, all involved words seem to be much too generic to find anything, and Google does not search for slashes. - I was also looking for another document (Posix?) to help here but came up empty. My questions: - Is there any standard way to approach this problem? Has it come up before in other applications? - Do you know a resource which explains how Posix apps are expected to handle paths like this? - Does Cygwin offer another way around this problem? Could cygpath be of any help? Thank you very much for any pointers you can give me! Thorsten -- Auch Hunger ist Krieg. - Willy Brandt [-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: UNC Pathname Handling within Applications 2004-07-15 4:15 UNC Pathname Handling within Applications Thorsten Haude @ 2004-07-15 4:48 ` Christopher Faylor 2004-07-15 5:19 ` Thorsten Haude 2004-07-15 22:58 ` Shankar Unni 1 sibling, 1 reply; 26+ messages in thread From: Christopher Faylor @ 2004-07-15 4:48 UTC (permalink / raw) To: cygwin On Thu, Jul 15, 2004 at 05:32:32AM +0200, Thorsten Haude wrote: >I'm trying to find the best approach to solve a bug reported against >NEdit: >https://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=873188&group_id=11005&atid=111005 > >The reporter complains that NEdit cannot open files from network >shares using Cygwin's double-slash notation. That is not suprising, >since NEdit silently drops any doubled slash before using the path. > >I know that NEdit is not the only application ignoring multiplied >slashes, so I wonder how this is normally handled with Cygwin. Indeed, >a simple test on Linux seems to indicate that fopen() accepts any >number of slashes, so this is not isolated to NEdit. Why would the fact that linux can open files with any number of slashes indicative of a problem with other applications? Cygwin can open files with any number of slashes too as long as they are not the first slash. >- The user guide ("Mapping path names") does tell me something about >what's to expect but little about implementation. Implementation of what? It isn't obvious what you are expecting cygwin to do or how you are expecting it to help. By the time Cygwin sees the file spec the extra slash has been removed. There is no amount of help that cygwin can provide at that point. >- Googling brought me zilch, all involved words seem to be much too >generic to find anything, and Google does not search for slashes. >- I was also looking for another document (Posix?) to help here but >came up empty. > > >My questions: >- Is there any standard way to approach this problem? This is an application problem, not a windows or cygwin problem. Double slashes at the beginnning of a path name are allowed to mean something different and if an application doesn't recognize that fact, that is at least arguably a bug. So, no, there is no "standard" way to approach the problem. You have to modify the application if you want it to recognize this syntax. Alternately, you can just mount your network shares: mount -b '//foo/bar' /bar and refer to files as /bar/blah , bypassing the need to use double slashes. cgf -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: UNC Pathname Handling within Applications 2004-07-15 4:48 ` Christopher Faylor @ 2004-07-15 5:19 ` Thorsten Haude 2004-07-15 7:25 ` Christopher Faylor 0 siblings, 1 reply; 26+ messages in thread From: Thorsten Haude @ 2004-07-15 5:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: cygwin [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2341 bytes --] Hi, * Christopher Faylor wrote (2004-07-15 06:15): >On Thu, Jul 15, 2004 at 05:32:32AM +0200, Thorsten Haude wrote: >>I know that NEdit is not the only application ignoring multiplied >>slashes, so I wonder how this is normally handled with Cygwin. Indeed, >>a simple test on Linux seems to indicate that fopen() accepts any >>number of slashes, so this is not isolated to NEdit. > >Why would the fact that linux can open files with any number of slashes >indicative of a problem with other applications? Cygwin can open files >with any number of slashes too as long as they are not the first slash. I only wanted to point out that this might not be the first time that this particular problem came up. >>- The user guide ("Mapping path names") does tell me something about >>what's to expect but little about implementation. > >Implementation of what? It isn't obvious what you are expecting cygwin >to do or how you are expecting it to help. By the time Cygwin sees the >file spec the extra slash has been removed. There is no amount of help >that cygwin can provide at that point. Well, Cygwin does already provide services for converting filenames, so I thought it might be worthwhile to ask whether similar services exist for the point in question. >>- Googling brought me zilch, all involved words seem to be much too >>generic to find anything, and Google does not search for slashes. >>- I was also looking for another document (Posix?) to help here but >>came up empty. >> >> >>My questions: >>- Is there any standard way to approach this problem? > >This is an application problem, not a windows or cygwin problem. Double >slashes at the beginnning of a path name are allowed to mean something >different and if an application doesn't recognize that fact, that is at >least arguably a bug. Where is it defined that double slashes at the beginning of a path are allowed to mean something? Is this C? Posix? To find the source of this convention could really help to find the best way to remove this problem. Thanks! Thorsten -- Rarely do we find people who willingly engage in hard, solid thinking. There is an almost universal quest for easy answers and half-baked solutions. Nothing pains some people more than having to think. - Martin Luther King [-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: UNC Pathname Handling within Applications 2004-07-15 5:19 ` Thorsten Haude @ 2004-07-15 7:25 ` Christopher Faylor 2004-07-15 7:47 ` Thorsten Haude 0 siblings, 1 reply; 26+ messages in thread From: Christopher Faylor @ 2004-07-15 7:25 UTC (permalink / raw) To: cygwin On Thu, Jul 15, 2004 at 06:48:36AM +0200, Thorsten Haude wrote: >Hi, > >* Christopher Faylor wrote (2004-07-15 06:15): >>On Thu, Jul 15, 2004 at 05:32:32AM +0200, Thorsten Haude wrote: >>>I know that NEdit is not the only application ignoring multiplied >>>slashes, so I wonder how this is normally handled with Cygwin. Indeed, >>>a simple test on Linux seems to indicate that fopen() accepts any >>>number of slashes, so this is not isolated to NEdit. >> >>Why would the fact that linux can open files with any number of slashes >>indicative of a problem with other applications? Cygwin can open files >>with any number of slashes too as long as they are not the first slash. > >I only wanted to point out that this might not be the first time that >this particular problem came up. > > >>>- The user guide ("Mapping path names") does tell me something about >>>what's to expect but little about implementation. >> >>Implementation of what? It isn't obvious what you are expecting cygwin >>to do or how you are expecting it to help. By the time Cygwin sees the >>file spec the extra slash has been removed. There is no amount of help >>that cygwin can provide at that point. > >Well, Cygwin does already provide services for converting filenames, >so I thought it might be worthwhile to ask whether similar services >exist for the point in question. The only services that are available are for translating cygwin path names to and from Windows path names. Filenames beginning with two slashes are both valid cygwin path names and windows path names so there is no conversion routine necessary. >>This is an application problem, not a windows or cygwin problem. Double >>slashes at the beginnning of a path name are allowed to mean something >>different and if an application doesn't recognize that fact, that is at >>least arguably a bug. > >Where is it defined that double slashes at the beginning of a path are >allowed to mean something? Is this C? Posix? To find the source of >this convention could really help to find the best way to remove this >problem. http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/007908799/xbd/glossary.html#tag_004_000_196 This says that an implementation is allowed to consider two leading slashes as special. You still have to look at Nedit's code and fix it so that two leading slashes are not compressed into one, however. I don't know why knowing that someone says it's official helps much. -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: UNC Pathname Handling within Applications 2004-07-15 7:25 ` Christopher Faylor @ 2004-07-15 7:47 ` Thorsten Haude 0 siblings, 0 replies; 26+ messages in thread From: Thorsten Haude @ 2004-07-15 7:47 UTC (permalink / raw) To: cygwin [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 329 bytes --] Hi, * Christopher Faylor wrote (2004-07-15 07:18): >I don't know why knowing that someone says it's official helps much. It doesn't I just wanted to make sure whether there are any other issues that might come up later. Thank you for your help. Thorsten -- Guns don't protect freedom, people protect freedom. [-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: UNC Pathname Handling within Applications 2004-07-15 4:15 UNC Pathname Handling within Applications Thorsten Haude 2004-07-15 4:48 ` Christopher Faylor @ 2004-07-15 22:58 ` Shankar Unni 2004-07-16 0:03 ` Thorsten Haude 1 sibling, 1 reply; 26+ messages in thread From: Shankar Unni @ 2004-07-15 22:58 UTC (permalink / raw) To: cygwin Thorsten Haude wrote: > - Is there any standard way to approach this problem? Has it come up > before in other applications? I don't know why you are even trying to normalize the paths like this. Just hand the thing off to the OS. Usually, both the user and the OS know what it is they are trying to do. For your program to try to mediate between them, and try to "understand and correct" the user's request is almost always inappropriate. Don't even try to normalize "\" to "/" or vice-versa. Windows APIs (the low-level ones) know perfectly well how to handle forward-slashes as directory separators.. > - Do you know a resource which explains how Posix apps are expected to > handle paths like this? It doesn't matter. Just pass the names, as is, to the underlying OS API. POSIX specifically says that *two* leading slashes "implementation defined" behavior, and this is specifically to allow NetBIOS-like (and AFS-like) names in POSIX implementations. -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: UNC Pathname Handling within Applications 2004-07-15 22:58 ` Shankar Unni @ 2004-07-16 0:03 ` Thorsten Haude 2004-07-16 2:31 ` Larry Hall 2004-07-16 18:45 ` Shankar Unni 0 siblings, 2 replies; 26+ messages in thread From: Thorsten Haude @ 2004-07-16 0:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: cygwin [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 608 bytes --] Hi, * Shankar Unni wrote (2004-07-16 00:52): >Thorsten Haude wrote: >>- Is there any standard way to approach this problem? Has it come up >>before in other applications? > >I don't know why you are even trying to normalize the paths like this. >Just hand the thing off to the OS. Usually, both the user and the OS >know what it is they are trying to do. The path is also displayed at various places. The user might be surprised to see surplus slashes. Thorsten -- Das Briefgeheimnis sowie das Post- und Fernmeldegeheimnis sind unverletzlich. - Grundgesetz, Artikel 10, Abs. 1 [-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: UNC Pathname Handling within Applications 2004-07-16 0:03 ` Thorsten Haude @ 2004-07-16 2:31 ` Larry Hall 2004-07-16 12:30 ` Thorsten Haude 2004-07-16 18:45 ` Shankar Unni 1 sibling, 1 reply; 26+ messages in thread From: Larry Hall @ 2004-07-16 2:31 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Thorsten Haude, cygwin At 07:30 PM 7/15/2004, you wrote: >Hi, > >* Shankar Unni wrote (2004-07-16 00:52): >>Thorsten Haude wrote: >>>- Is there any standard way to approach this problem? Has it come up >>>before in other applications? >> >>I don't know why you are even trying to normalize the paths like this. >>Just hand the thing off to the OS. Usually, both the user and the OS >>know what it is they are trying to do. > >The path is also displayed at various places. The user might be >surprised to see surplus slashes. Better that they be surprised and have things work than be surprised and complain when things don't work. Don't shield them from the reality of the real world. It's a learning experience and depriving them of that won't help anyone. That ends the philosophy lesson for today. Please go back to your homes now and meditate on this. ;-) -- Larry Hall http://www.rfk.com RFK Partners, Inc. (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office 838 Washington Street (508) 893-9889 - FAX Holliston, MA 01746 -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: UNC Pathname Handling within Applications 2004-07-16 2:31 ` Larry Hall @ 2004-07-16 12:30 ` Thorsten Haude 2004-07-16 13:01 ` Corinna Vinschen 2004-07-16 16:00 ` Larry Hall 0 siblings, 2 replies; 26+ messages in thread From: Thorsten Haude @ 2004-07-16 12:30 UTC (permalink / raw) To: cygwin [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1470 bytes --] Hi, please send me every mail only once. Thanks. * Larry Hall wrote (2004-07-16 04:21): >At 07:30 PM 7/15/2004, you wrote: >>* Shankar Unni wrote (2004-07-16 00:52): >>>Thorsten Haude wrote: >>>>- Is there any standard way to approach this problem? Has it come up >>>>before in other applications? >>> >>>I don't know why you are even trying to normalize the paths like this. >>>Just hand the thing off to the OS. Usually, both the user and the OS >>>know what it is they are trying to do. >> >>The path is also displayed at various places. The user might be >>surprised to see surplus slashes. > >Better that they be surprised and have things work than be surprised and >complain when things don't work. Don't shield them from the reality of the >real world. It's a learning experience and depriving them of that won't >help anyone. I think some people might see the surprising path, *think* the software is broken and stop using it. Another problem ist the toolkit. I agree that the leading extra slash should be supported, but it might not be as easy as it sounds. >That ends the philosophy lesson for today. Please go back to your homes >now and meditate on this. ;-) Thank you, O wise one! Thorsten -- As we enjoy great advantages from the inventions of others we should be glad of an opportunity to serve others by any invention of ours, and this we should do freely and generously. - Benjamin Franklin [-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: UNC Pathname Handling within Applications 2004-07-16 12:30 ` Thorsten Haude @ 2004-07-16 13:01 ` Corinna Vinschen 2004-07-16 13:35 ` Thorsten Haude 2004-07-16 16:00 ` Larry Hall 1 sibling, 1 reply; 26+ messages in thread From: Corinna Vinschen @ 2004-07-16 13:01 UTC (permalink / raw) To: cygwin On Jul 16 14:06, Thorsten Haude wrote: > I think some people might see the surprising path, *think* the > software is broken and stop using it. Another problem ist the toolkit. > > I agree that the leading extra slash should be supported, but it might > not be as easy as it sounds. Thorsten, even if I repeat other postings, please note that double slashes are absolutely fine according to the standards. Leading double slashes may have a special meaning on POSIX implementations and the *well* *known* Windows specific meaning is an UNC path for accessing network (CIFS) shares. Honestly, there should be no surprise in that fact to users of your software. If you really want to mangle file names in your application instead of just leaving them alone, then your application should honor that fact, to be *portable*. This isn't us being mean, as usual, that's just fact. Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Co-Project Leader mailto:cygwin@cygwin.com Red Hat, Inc. -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: UNC Pathname Handling within Applications 2004-07-16 13:01 ` Corinna Vinschen @ 2004-07-16 13:35 ` Thorsten Haude 2004-07-16 13:42 ` Corinna Vinschen 0 siblings, 1 reply; 26+ messages in thread From: Thorsten Haude @ 2004-07-16 13:35 UTC (permalink / raw) To: cygwin [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 853 bytes --] Hi, * Corinna Vinschen wrote (2004-07-16 15:01): >even if I repeat other postings, please note that double slashes are >absolutely fine according to the standards. Leading double slashes may >have a special meaning on POSIX implementations and the *well* *known* >Windows specific meaning is an UNC path for accessing network (CIFS) >shares. Honestly, there should be no surprise in that fact to users >of your software. If you really want to mangle file names in your >application instead of just leaving them alone, then your application >should honor that fact, to be *portable*. > >This isn't us being mean, as usual, that's just fact. I already agreed that it should be supported, so what's missing? Thorsten -- The man who does not read good books has no advantage over the man who cannot read them. - Mark Twain [-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: UNC Pathname Handling within Applications 2004-07-16 13:35 ` Thorsten Haude @ 2004-07-16 13:42 ` Corinna Vinschen 0 siblings, 0 replies; 26+ messages in thread From: Corinna Vinschen @ 2004-07-16 13:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: cygwin On Jul 16 15:10, Thorsten Haude wrote: > Hi, > > * Corinna Vinschen wrote (2004-07-16 15:01): > >even if I repeat other postings, please note that double slashes are > >absolutely fine according to the standards. Leading double slashes may > >have a special meaning on POSIX implementations and the *well* *known* > >Windows specific meaning is an UNC path for accessing network (CIFS) > >shares. Honestly, there should be no surprise in that fact to users > >of your software. If you really want to mangle file names in your > >application instead of just leaving them alone, then your application > >should honor that fact, to be *portable*. > > > >This isn't us being mean, as usual, that's just fact. > > I already agreed that it should be supported, so what's missing? Erm... nothing, apparently. I must have misinterpreted your posting. Sorry, Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Co-Project Leader mailto:cygwin@cygwin.com Red Hat, Inc. -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: UNC Pathname Handling within Applications 2004-07-16 12:30 ` Thorsten Haude 2004-07-16 13:01 ` Corinna Vinschen @ 2004-07-16 16:00 ` Larry Hall 2004-07-16 18:36 ` Thorsten Haude 1 sibling, 1 reply; 26+ messages in thread From: Larry Hall @ 2004-07-16 16:00 UTC (permalink / raw) To: cygwin Thorsten, The best way to insure that you get only one copy of any response from the list is to set your reply-to to point to the list. Depending on the software you use, you may find that you can easily filter out duplicates too. I don't second-guess the implied intent of posters to whom I respond by editing the recipient list but my email client automatically honors when "reply-to" is set. Most do. I'd recommend setting it when you correspond with this list or any that you subscribe to. Larry PS - I've edited the recipient list in this case for you, given your stated preference. At 08:06 AM 7/16/2004, you wrote: >Hi, > >please send me every mail only once. Thanks. > >* Larry Hall wrote (2004-07-16 04:21): >>At 07:30 PM 7/15/2004, you wrote: >>>* Shankar Unni wrote (2004-07-16 00:52): >>>>Thorsten Haude wrote: >>>>>- Is there any standard way to approach this problem? Has it come up >>>>>before in other applications? >>>> >>>>I don't know why you are even trying to normalize the paths like this. >>>>Just hand the thing off to the OS. Usually, both the user and the OS >>>>know what it is they are trying to do. >>> >>>The path is also displayed at various places. The user might be >>>surprised to see surplus slashes. >> >>Better that they be surprised and have things work than be surprised and >>complain when things don't work. Don't shield them from the reality of the >>real world. It's a learning experience and depriving them of that won't >>help anyone. > >I think some people might see the surprising path, *think* the >software is broken and stop using it. Another problem ist the toolkit. > >I agree that the leading extra slash should be supported, but it might >not be as easy as it sounds. > > >>That ends the philosophy lesson for today. Please go back to your homes >>now and meditate on this. ;-) > >Thank you, O wise one! > > >Thorsten >-- >As we enjoy great advantages from the inventions of others we should >be glad of an opportunity to serve others by any invention of ours, >and this we should do freely and generously. > - Benjamin Franklin -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: UNC Pathname Handling within Applications 2004-07-16 16:00 ` Larry Hall @ 2004-07-16 18:36 ` Thorsten Haude 2004-07-16 19:36 ` Larry Hall 0 siblings, 1 reply; 26+ messages in thread From: Thorsten Haude @ 2004-07-16 18:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: cygwin [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4974 bytes --] Hi, I sent the sollowing message to Larry via private mail: - - - Schnipp - - - Hi Larry, please don't use tofu mails. http://www.vranx.de/mail/tofu.html * Larry Hall wrote (2004-07-16 17:41): >The best way to insure that you get only one copy of any response from the >list is to set your reply-to to point to the list. I think the Reply-To header is quite unfit for that. For once, it it mungled often enough that I had to check with every list whether I could use it or not. Second, the Reply-To header has a different purpose. If would eg. post to the list from a mobile phone, I would want a way to ensure that I don't get the entire list on this mobile, accumulating huge costs. Reply-To ist that way. Third, Reply-To is a much stronger way to redirect replies. If this mail would have been sent to the list, I might set the Reply-To header to indicate that further discussion should be done off-list. Instead I use the Mail-Followup-To header as described here: http://cr.yp.to/proto/replyto.html >Depending on the software you use, you may find that you can easily >filter out duplicates too. That wouldn't be entirely satisfactory either for two reasons: - The list mail would usually arrive second and be destroyed. That leaves not-list messages in my list folder. - I might be lead to think that it *is* a personal reply (like this one) and answer personally where a list answer might be more approppriate. >I don't second-guess the implied intent of posters to whom I respond >by editing the recipient list but my email client automatically >honors when "reply-to" is set. Most do. I'd recommend setting it >when you correspond with this list or any that you subscribe to. Actually, I wonder what possible reasons could exist to send every mail twice, and even by default. I haven't checked, but I guess you cannot subscribe this list or any other write-only, so in what possible situation would the second mail enhance communication? So my recommendation to you, O wise one, is to just skip the second mail, reply to the list *or* in personal way as preferred for a particular mail and be done with it. Thorsten -- As we enjoy great advantages from the inventions of others we should be glad of an opportunity to serve others by any invention of ours, and this we should do freely and generously. - Benjamin Franklin - - - Schnapp - - - In an ironic twist I got this reply from the list manager: - - - Schnipp - - - Hi! This is the ezmlm program. I'm managing the cygwin@cygwin.com mailing list. This is a generic help message. The message I received wasn't sent to any of my command addresses. --- Administrative commands for the cygwin list --- I can handle administrative requests automatically. Please DO NOT SEND THEM TO THE LIST ADDRESS! If you do, I will not see them and other subscribers will be annoyed. Instead, send your message to the correct command address: To subscribe to the list, send a message to: <cygwin-subscribe@cygwin.com> To remove your address from the list, send a message to: <cygwin-unsubscribe@cygwin.com> Send mail to the following for info and FAQ for this list: <cygwin-info@cygwin.com> <cygwin-faq@cygwin.com> Similar addresses exist for the digest list: <cygwin-digest-subscribe@cygwin.com> <cygwin-digest-unsubscribe@cygwin.com> To get messages 123 through 145 (a maximum of 100 per request), mail: <cygwin-get.123_145@cygwin.com> To get an index with subject and author for messages 123-456 , mail: <cygwin-index.123_456@cygwin.com> They are always returned as sets of 100, max 2000 per request, so you'll actually get 100-499. To receive all messages with the same subject as message 12345, send an empty message to: <cygwin-thread.12345@cygwin.com> The messages do not really need to be empty, but I will ignore their content. Only the ADDRESS you send to is important. You can start a subscription for an alternate address, for example "john@host.domain", just add a hyphen and your address (with '=' instead of '@') after the command word: <cygwin-subscribe-john=host.domain@cygwin.com> To stop subscription for this address, mail: <cygwin-unsubscribe-john=host.domain@cygwin.com> In both cases, I'll send a confirmation message to that address. When you receive it, simply reply to it to complete your subscription. If despite following these instructions, you do not get the desired results, please contact my owner at cygwin-owner@cygwin.com. Please be patient, my owner is a lot slower than I am ;-) --- Enclosed is a copy of the request I received. (...) - - - Schnapp - - - Thorsten -- As we enjoy great advantages from the inventions of others we should be glad of an opportunity to serve others by any invention of ours, and this we should do freely and generously. - Benjamin Franklin [-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: UNC Pathname Handling within Applications 2004-07-16 18:36 ` Thorsten Haude @ 2004-07-16 19:36 ` Larry Hall 2004-07-16 20:01 ` Thorsten Haude 0 siblings, 1 reply; 26+ messages in thread From: Larry Hall @ 2004-07-16 19:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: cygwin At 02:13 PM 7/16/2004, you wrote: >Hi, > >I sent the sollowing message to Larry via private mail: Sorry. Everything I post to the list I want to be on the list. So only the list version got through. I guess you figured that out by now. If you would like to continue this or some other discussion off-list (and continuing it much beyond this is likely getting OT so that would make sense), reply to the list and let me know that's the direction you want to go. I'll then reply to you directly and we can finish up off list. >- - - Schnipp - - - >Hi Larry, > >please don't use tofu mails. http://www.vranx.de/mail/tofu.html Ah-huh. >* Larry Hall wrote (2004-07-16 17:41): >>The best way to insure that you get only one copy of any response from the >>list is to set your reply-to to point to the list. > >I think the Reply-To header is quite unfit for that. > >For once, it it mungled often enough that I had to check with every >list whether I could use it or not. OK, it is not munged by this list. >Second, the Reply-To header has a different purpose. If would eg. post >to the list from a mobile phone, I would want a way to ensure that I >don't get the entire list on this mobile, accumulating huge costs. >Reply-To ist that way. Sorry, you've left this a bit vague. If you're implying that you want to get a reply on your mobile and that that address is different than the one you subscribed to the list with, I agree. But that doesn't seem to be particularly pertinent other than its a way that Reply-To can be used. >Third, Reply-To is a much stronger way to redirect replies. If this >mail would have been sent to the list, I might set the Reply-To header >to indicate that further discussion should be done off-list. That's fine, if that's what you want. >Instead I use the Mail-Followup-To header as described here: >http://cr.yp.to/proto/replyto.html > So you do. I guess my email client doesn't honor that. :-( Sorry about that. Well, looks like we're at a bit of an impasse here then until one of us makes a change, unless I *always* remember to edit my replies to you (not likely unfortunately). >>Depending on the software you use, you may find that you can easily >>filter out duplicates too. > >That wouldn't be entirely satisfactory either for two reasons: >- The list mail would usually arrive second and be destroyed. That >leaves not-list messages in my list folder. >- I might be lead to think that it *is* a personal reply (like this >one) and answer personally where a list answer might be more >approppriate. People do this with their email clients directly or through the help of procmail. Obviously, there are ways to address your concerns, though I'm not suggesting that this is what you need to do. Just that it is an option for you as a way to deal with those who can't or won't honor your settings/requests. >>I don't second-guess the implied intent of posters to whom I respond >>by editing the recipient list but my email client automatically >>honors when "reply-to" is set. Most do. I'd recommend setting it >>when you correspond with this list or any that you subscribe to. > >Actually, I wonder what possible reasons could exist to send every >mail twice, and even by default. I haven't checked, but I guess you >cannot subscribe this list or any other write-only, so in what >possible situation would the second mail enhance communication? You guessed wrong. That's exactly why I use reply-to-all. You don't have to be subscribed to the list to post to it. >So my recommendation to you, O wise one, is to just skip the second >mail, reply to the list *or* in personal way as preferred for a >particular mail and be done with it. OK, fair recommendation, considering I had ones for you (well I would have called my suggestions but what's semantics between friends ;-) ). Just like you, I have reasons for replying as I do and they have served me well on this list low these many years. I don't plan on changing them. I have added "followup-to" to my list of important features that my next email client has, once I make a switch though. Thanks for the pointer to that. -- Larry Hall http://www.rfk.com RFK Partners, Inc. (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office 838 Washington Street (508) 893-9889 - FAX Holliston, MA 01746 -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: UNC Pathname Handling within Applications 2004-07-16 19:36 ` Larry Hall @ 2004-07-16 20:01 ` Thorsten Haude 2004-07-16 21:02 ` Larry Hall ` (2 more replies) 0 siblings, 3 replies; 26+ messages in thread From: Thorsten Haude @ 2004-07-16 20:01 UTC (permalink / raw) To: cygwin [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3547 bytes --] Hi, * Larry Hall wrote (2004-07-16 21:19): >At 02:13 PM 7/16/2004, you wrote: >>I sent the sollowing message to Larry via private mail: > >Sorry. Everything I post to the list I want to be on the list. I expected that to be a misconfiguration of some kind, now you say you do that on purpose. It's your choice to prefer discussions on the list, but I it's highly annoying to send people off to some non-existing address that you not even own. >If you would like to continue this or some other discussion off-list, >reply to the list and let me know that's the direction you want to go. What other loops have I got to jump through trying to communicate with you? If you force this discussion on the list by avoiding to open other means of communication, that's what you get. >(and continuing it much beyond this is likely getting OT so that >would make sense)> Which is exactly the reason I wanted to take this off-list. Your Reply-To antics is what prevented it. >>I think the Reply-To header is quite unfit for that. >> >>For once, it it mungled often enough that I had to check with every >>list whether I could use it or not. > >OK, it is not munged by this list. Yeah, but I don't want to check every time somebody insists to send me every mail twice. >>Instead I use the Mail-Followup-To header as described here: >>http://cr.yp.to/proto/replyto.html > >So you do. I guess my email client doesn't honor that. Your email client *sets* Mail-Followup-To, so it must be pretty crappy to ignore it on inbound mail. >>>Depending on the software you use, you may find that you can easily >>>filter out duplicates too. >> >>That wouldn't be entirely satisfactory either for two reasons: >>- The list mail would usually arrive second and be destroyed. That >>leaves not-list messages in my list folder. >>- I might be lead to think that it *is* a personal reply (like this >>one) and answer personally where a list answer might be more >>approppriate. > >People do this with their email clients directly or through the help >of procmail. People do *what* with Procmail? I've never seen an MDA recipe that deletes the *first* mail of an identical set. It's rather hard to do, too, since the MDA would have to remember where that first mail went. >>>I don't second-guess the implied intent of posters to whom I respond >>>by editing the recipient list but my email client automatically >>>honors when "reply-to" is set. Most do. I'd recommend setting it >>>when you correspond with this list or any that you subscribe to. >> >>Actually, I wonder what possible reasons could exist to send every >>mail twice, and even by default. I haven't checked, but I guess you >>cannot subscribe this list or any other write-only, so in what >>possible situation would the second mail enhance communication? > >You guessed wrong. Please tell me how I activate the write-only subscription. >That's exactly why I use reply-to-all. You don't have to be >subscribed to the list to post to it. Ok, so find a way to identify these so that you don't have to send each mail out twice by default. If these people do not care enough to subscribe, why should you care to accomodate them? >(well I would have called my suggestions but what's semantics between >friends ;-) ) Yeah, let's discuss our knowledge of the english language. Is there any lower point you could have made? Thorsten -- Guns don't protect freedom, people protect freedom. [-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: UNC Pathname Handling within Applications 2004-07-16 20:01 ` Thorsten Haude @ 2004-07-16 21:02 ` Larry Hall 2004-07-16 21:19 ` Thorsten Haude 2004-07-16 21:08 ` Igor Pechtchanski 2004-07-16 21:25 ` Christopher Faylor 2 siblings, 1 reply; 26+ messages in thread From: Larry Hall @ 2004-07-16 21:02 UTC (permalink / raw) To: cygwin At 03:55 PM 7/16/2004, you wrote: <snip> >>>Actually, I wonder what possible reasons could exist to send every >>>mail twice, and even by default. I haven't checked, but I guess you >>>cannot subscribe this list or any other write-only, so in what >>>possible situation would the second mail enhance communication? >> >>You guessed wrong. > >Please tell me how I activate the write-only subscription. > <snip> You don't need to be subscribed to the Cygwin list to send email to it. See <http://cygwin.com/lists.html>. Unless you have some further pertinent point to make on this inquiry, I think we're done with this thread. Been nice talking with you. Larry Hall http://www.rfk.com RFK Partners, Inc. (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office 838 Washington Street (508) 893-9889 - FAX Holliston, MA 01746 -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: UNC Pathname Handling within Applications 2004-07-16 21:02 ` Larry Hall @ 2004-07-16 21:19 ` Thorsten Haude 0 siblings, 0 replies; 26+ messages in thread From: Thorsten Haude @ 2004-07-16 21:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: cygwin [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1065 bytes --] Hi, * Larry Hall wrote (2004-07-16 22:29): >At 03:55 PM 7/16/2004, you wrote: >>>>Actually, I wonder what possible reasons could exist to send every >>>>mail twice, and even by default. I haven't checked, but I guess you >>>>cannot subscribe this list or any other write-only, so in what >>>>possible situation would the second mail enhance communication? >>> >>>You guessed wrong. >> >>Please tell me how I activate the write-only subscription. > ><snip> > >You don't need to be subscribed to the Cygwin list to send email to it. >See <http://cygwin.com/lists.html>. I referred to that fact in the part you generously snipped. >Unless you have some further pertinent point to make on this inquiry, I >think we're done with this thread. You don't figure to be a guy caring about points. Thorsten -- There must be a parallel universe where Starbucks sells cocaine in dilute, controlled, taxed doses, but where (crack) caffiene is sniffed and smoked in huge binges, and smuggled in by evil Columbian cartels. - Rogerborg [-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: UNC Pathname Handling within Applications 2004-07-16 20:01 ` Thorsten Haude 2004-07-16 21:02 ` Larry Hall @ 2004-07-16 21:08 ` Igor Pechtchanski 2004-07-16 21:25 ` Christopher Faylor 2 siblings, 0 replies; 26+ messages in thread From: Igor Pechtchanski @ 2004-07-16 21:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Thorsten Haude; +Cc: cygwin On Fri, 16 Jul 2004, Thorsten Haude wrote: > Please tell me how I activate the write-only subscription. See <http://cygwin.com/ml/lists.html#rbl-sucks>. Igor -- http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/ |\ _,,,---,,_ pechtcha@cs.nyu.edu ZZZzz /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ igor@watson.ibm.com |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D. '---''(_/--' `-'\_) fL a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-. Meow! "I have since come to realize that being between your mentor and his route to the bathroom is a major career booster." -- Patrick Naughton -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: UNC Pathname Handling within Applications 2004-07-16 20:01 ` Thorsten Haude 2004-07-16 21:02 ` Larry Hall 2004-07-16 21:08 ` Igor Pechtchanski @ 2004-07-16 21:25 ` Christopher Faylor 2004-07-16 21:41 ` Thorsten Haude 2 siblings, 1 reply; 26+ messages in thread From: Christopher Faylor @ 2004-07-16 21:25 UTC (permalink / raw) To: cygwin On Fri, Jul 16, 2004 at 09:55:49PM +0200, Thorsten Haude wrote: >* Larry Hall wrote (2004-07-16 21:19): >Your email client *sets* Mail-Followup-To, so it must be pretty crappy >to ignore it on inbound mail. This field is added by the ezmlm software that is used to manage our mailing lists. >I've never seen an MDA recipe that deletes the *first* mail of an >identical set. It's rather hard to do, too, since the MDA would have >to remember where that first mail went. More things in heaven and earth, Horatio? From the procmailex manpage: If you are subscribed to several mailinglists and people cross-post to some of them, you usually receive several duplicate mails (one from every list). The following simple recipe eliminates duplicate mails. It tells formail to keep an 8KB cache file in which it will store the Message-IDs of the most recent mails you received. Since Message-IDs are guaranteed to be unique for every new mail, they are ideally suited to weed out duplicate mails. Simply put the following recipe at the top of your rcfile, and no duplicate mail will get past it. :0 Wh: msgid.lock | formail -D 8192 msgid.cache -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: UNC Pathname Handling within Applications 2004-07-16 21:25 ` Christopher Faylor @ 2004-07-16 21:41 ` Thorsten Haude 2004-07-17 1:53 ` Christopher Faylor 0 siblings, 1 reply; 26+ messages in thread From: Thorsten Haude @ 2004-07-16 21:41 UTC (permalink / raw) To: cygwin [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1834 bytes --] Hi, * Christopher Faylor wrote (2004-07-16 23:19): >On Fri, Jul 16, 2004 at 09:55:49PM +0200, Thorsten Haude wrote: >>* Larry Hall wrote (2004-07-16 21:19): >>Your email client *sets* Mail-Followup-To, so it must be pretty crappy >>to ignore it on inbound mail. > >This field is added by the ezmlm software that is used to manage our >mailing lists. Ah, so he is just ignoring good advice given by the list software. Thanks for clarifying that. Sorry Larry, your mailer is not crappy. >>I've never seen an MDA recipe that deletes the *first* mail of an >>identical set. It's rather hard to do, too, since the MDA would have >>to remember where that first mail went. > >More things in heaven and earth, Horatio? > > From the procmailex manpage: > > If you are subscribed to several mailinglists and people cross-post to > some of them, you usually receive several duplicate mails (one from > every list). The following simple recipe eliminates duplicate mails. > It tells formail to keep an 8KB cache file in which it will store the > Message-IDs of the most recent mails you received. Since Message-IDs > are guaranteed to be unique for every new mail, they are ideally suited > to weed out duplicate mails. Simply put the following recipe at the > top of your rcfile, and no duplicate mail will get past it. > > :0 Wh: msgid.lock > | formail -D 8192 msgid.cache I don't intend to install procmail to test this, but are you sure that this recipe deletes the *first* of the two mails? From the manpage, it looks like the second mail would be removed. Thorsten -- The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum. - Noam Chomsky [-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: UNC Pathname Handling within Applications 2004-07-16 21:41 ` Thorsten Haude @ 2004-07-17 1:53 ` Christopher Faylor 2004-07-17 9:13 ` Thorsten Haude 0 siblings, 1 reply; 26+ messages in thread From: Christopher Faylor @ 2004-07-17 1:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: cygwin On Fri, Jul 16, 2004 at 11:32:56PM +0200, Thorsten Haude wrote: >Hi, > >* Christopher Faylor wrote (2004-07-16 23:19): >>On Fri, Jul 16, 2004 at 09:55:49PM +0200, Thorsten Haude wrote: >>>* Larry Hall wrote (2004-07-16 21:19): >>>Your email client *sets* Mail-Followup-To, so it must be pretty crappy >>>to ignore it on inbound mail. >> >>This field is added by the ezmlm software that is used to manage our >>mailing lists. > >Ah, so he is just ignoring good advice given by the list software. >Thanks for clarifying that. > >Sorry Larry, your mailer is not crappy. You must have forgotten. He said his mailer does not honor this header not that he, personally, is ignoring it. Larry said that he would try to avoid sending you an extra copy in the future and he has explained the reason for his email habits. You don't have to agree with his reasons but continuing to carp at him is pointless. >>>I've never seen an MDA recipe that deletes the *first* mail of an >>>identical set. It's rather hard to do, too, since the MDA would have >>>to remember where that first mail went. >> >>More things in heaven and earth, Horatio? >> >> From the procmailex manpage: >> >> If you are subscribed to several mailinglists and people cross-post to >> some of them, you usually receive several duplicate mails (one from >> every list). The following simple recipe eliminates duplicate mails. >> It tells formail to keep an 8KB cache file in which it will store the >> Message-IDs of the most recent mails you received. Since Message-IDs >> are guaranteed to be unique for every new mail, they are ideally suited >> to weed out duplicate mails. Simply put the following recipe at the >> top of your rcfile, and no duplicate mail will get past it. >> >> :0 Wh: msgid.lock >> | formail -D 8192 msgid.cache > >I don't intend to install procmail to test this, but are you sure that >this recipe deletes the *first* of the two mails? From the manpage, it >looks like the second mail would be removed. You're right. It doesn't delete the first. I didn't think you really meant to delete the first message since that seemed to imply some kind of precognitive ability -- how could a program ever know when there are potentially N copies of a message being sent? I guess you could delay every email message delivery for an hour or so to make sure that you've gotten them all but that isn't foolproof. I don't understand why it matters that the first message would be deleted since you can't predict if the message would be directly to you or to the cygwin list. However, please don't enlighten me since I can live with not knowing. More importantly, your personal email preferences and my ignorance of same are really off-topic here. Perhaps most importantly, shouldn't you be hard at work on Nedit now that you know that there is no way for cygwin to reach inside the program and stop the Nedit path handling software from deleting needed double slashes? Hmm. Maybe there's a market there. If we could develop that precognitive mail software, how hard would developing a DLL that telepathically changed the program flow of path handling software be? *pause* Nuts. psychicsoftware.com is already taken. -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: UNC Pathname Handling within Applications 2004-07-17 1:53 ` Christopher Faylor @ 2004-07-17 9:13 ` Thorsten Haude 2004-07-18 10:50 ` Hannu E K Nevalainen 0 siblings, 1 reply; 26+ messages in thread From: Thorsten Haude @ 2004-07-17 9:13 UTC (permalink / raw) To: cygwin [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 761 bytes --] Hi, * Christopher Faylor wrote (2004-07-17 03:50): >I don't understand why it matters that the first message would be >deleted since you can't predict if the message would be directly to you >or to the cygwin list. However, please don't enlighten me since I can >live with not knowing. More importantly, your personal email >preferences and my ignorance of same are really off-topic here. I explained that point before, but since you also seem to deprecate personal communication (and even make this point clear), I won't follow up on that. Thorsten -- He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. - Thomas Jefferson [-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* RE: UNC Pathname Handling within Applications 2004-07-17 9:13 ` Thorsten Haude @ 2004-07-18 10:50 ` Hannu E K Nevalainen 0 siblings, 0 replies; 26+ messages in thread From: Hannu E K Nevalainen @ 2004-07-18 10:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: cygwin cygwin-owner@cygwin.com wrote: > Hi, > > * Christopher Faylor wrote (2004-07-17 03:50): >> I don't understand why it matters that the first message would be >> deleted since you can't predict if the message would be directly to >> you or to the cygwin list. However, please don't enlighten me since >> I can live with not knowing. More importantly, your personal email >> preferences and my ignorance of same are really off-topic here. > > I explained that point before, but since you also seem to deprecate > personal communication (and even make this point clear), I won't > follow up on that. > > > Thorsten Wow, I'm impressed over the level of squabbling - In general: I would be very much IMPRESSED if ANY/ALL posters stopped attempting anything else than having cygwin@<ditto>.com in the To: field and clearing the other related fields. "Peronal replies" is mentioned in old netiquette docs, look up the docs and have a read - then please follow the recommendations. /Hannu E K Nevalainen, B.Sc. EE - 59+16.37'N, 17+12.60'E --76--> ** on a mailing list; please keep replies on that particular list ** -- printf("LocalTime: UTC+%02d\n",(DST)? 2:1); -- --END OF MESSAGE-- -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: UNC Pathname Handling within Applications 2004-07-16 0:03 ` Thorsten Haude 2004-07-16 2:31 ` Larry Hall @ 2004-07-16 18:45 ` Shankar Unni 2004-07-16 20:35 ` Thorsten Haude 1 sibling, 1 reply; 26+ messages in thread From: Shankar Unni @ 2004-07-16 18:45 UTC (permalink / raw) To: cygwin Thorsten Haude wrote: > The path is also displayed at various places. The user might be > surprised to see surplus slashes. [Starting to drift OT, sorry..] Who's generating the surplus slashes? Is this because of trailing "/" in paths, and you're internally compositing names somehow? I thought the only names you would *show* to the user would be the names of editor buffers, etc., something which the user has already specified explicitly anyway. It's not like you're saying "nedit myfile", and you're searching all over the filesystem to locate myfile.. If the name is something the user is already specifying as a relative or absolute path, then there's no need to further normalize them. If you *do* ever show to the user a path that nedit has composed itself (say, some property display, like "where is the foobar package that is automatically loaded?"), then the right thing is to only normalize *at the point where you do the composition*. I.e. if you're doing "prefix + basename", then the only normalization should be between prefix and basename (i.e. strip trailing slashes (any kind) from prefix, and append a "known slash" and basename). You shouldn't be doing any further normalization (e.g. /x/../y -> /y or any such), because if it *is* a synthesized name, then there's great value in knowing *how* the name was synthesized. Normalizing it loses this information. -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: UNC Pathname Handling within Applications 2004-07-16 18:45 ` Shankar Unni @ 2004-07-16 20:35 ` Thorsten Haude 0 siblings, 0 replies; 26+ messages in thread From: Thorsten Haude @ 2004-07-16 20:35 UTC (permalink / raw) To: cygwin [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1632 bytes --] Hi, * Shankar Unni wrote (2004-07-16 20:36): >Thorsten Haude wrote: > >>The path is also displayed at various places. The user might be >>surprised to see surplus slashes. > >[Starting to drift OT, sorry..] > >Who's generating the surplus slashes? Is this because of trailing "/" in >paths, and you're internally compositing names somehow? Yes, we never cared for that because we weren't aware of this leading slash thing. (I wasn't at least, and never heard about it before.) So we have to check all internals for problems. There will probably also be problems with the toolkit. >I thought the only names you would *show* to the user would be the names >of editor buffers, etc., something which the user has already specified >explicitly anyway. It's not like you're saying "nedit myfile", and >you're searching all over the filesystem to locate myfile.. The filename is used in several parts of the application. I expect some of them to make false assumptions about leading slashes. >I.e. if you're doing "prefix + basename", then the only normalization >should be between prefix and basename (i.e. strip trailing slashes (any >kind) from prefix, and append a "known slash" and basename). > >You shouldn't be doing any further normalization (e.g. /x/../y -> /y or >any such), because if it *is* a synthesized name, then there's great >value in knowing *how* the name was synthesized. Normalizing it loses >this information. These are the things we have to think about, yes. Thorsten -- Getting a thrill out of some stupid quote is a sign of idiocy. - turmeric [-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2004-07-18 10:20 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 26+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2004-07-15 4:15 UNC Pathname Handling within Applications Thorsten Haude 2004-07-15 4:48 ` Christopher Faylor 2004-07-15 5:19 ` Thorsten Haude 2004-07-15 7:25 ` Christopher Faylor 2004-07-15 7:47 ` Thorsten Haude 2004-07-15 22:58 ` Shankar Unni 2004-07-16 0:03 ` Thorsten Haude 2004-07-16 2:31 ` Larry Hall 2004-07-16 12:30 ` Thorsten Haude 2004-07-16 13:01 ` Corinna Vinschen 2004-07-16 13:35 ` Thorsten Haude 2004-07-16 13:42 ` Corinna Vinschen 2004-07-16 16:00 ` Larry Hall 2004-07-16 18:36 ` Thorsten Haude 2004-07-16 19:36 ` Larry Hall 2004-07-16 20:01 ` Thorsten Haude 2004-07-16 21:02 ` Larry Hall 2004-07-16 21:19 ` Thorsten Haude 2004-07-16 21:08 ` Igor Pechtchanski 2004-07-16 21:25 ` Christopher Faylor 2004-07-16 21:41 ` Thorsten Haude 2004-07-17 1:53 ` Christopher Faylor 2004-07-17 9:13 ` Thorsten Haude 2004-07-18 10:50 ` Hannu E K Nevalainen 2004-07-16 18:45 ` Shankar Unni 2004-07-16 20:35 ` Thorsten Haude
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).