From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4926 invoked by alias); 17 Jan 2005 17:13:20 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Received: (qmail 3061 invoked from network); 17 Jan 2005 17:12:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cgf.cx) (66.30.17.189) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 17 Jan 2005 17:12:29 -0000 Received: by cgf.cx (Postfix, from userid 201) id D1DEB1B522; Mon, 17 Jan 2005 12:12:26 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 17:32:00 -0000 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: odd behavior of symlinks on Win XP SP2 Message-ID: <20050117171226.GJ20403@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> Reply-To: cygwin@cygwin.com References: <200501171625.j0HGPQM13040@networking.Stanford.EDU> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200501171625.j0HGPQM13040@networking.Stanford.EDU> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-SW-Source: 2005-01/txt/msg00790.txt.bz2 On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 08:25:26AM -0800, Jeff.Hodges@KingsMountain.com wrote: >> I'm glad that you're talking about "us" as a group. Anybody interested >> in tracking that down? > >I'm not in a position to hack code on this unfortunately, but I can offer to >test. > >I suspect it's important in the longer term to track this down because they >(MSFT) ~could~ make further changes down the road that break cygwin-created >symlinks altogether (from the windoze perspective), which'd more than just >"annoying". No, Microsoft is not going to break things so that cygwin's symlinks no longer operate. Cygwin understands its own version of symlinks very well. 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/