On Oct 19 17:16, Ken Brown wrote:
> On 10/19/2016 7:10 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > On Sep 20 18:03, Ken Brown wrote:
> > > I found an old discussion
> > > (https://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2007-08/msg00594.html) about the
> > > possibility of adding a _PC_CASE_INSENSITIVE flag to pathconf.  Has anyone
> > > thought further about this?  I would find this useful for emacs[*].
> > > 
> > > I've taken a quick look at the pathconf code, and it looks like it wouldn't
> > > be difficult to add this.  I could try to provide a patch if the powers that
> > > be would be receptive.
> > 
> > /me marks herself as being receptive
> 
> Should the getconf utility be patched to support the new
> _PC_CASE_INSENSITIVE flag?  I'm asking because getconf doesn't currently
> support the Cygwin-only flags _PC_POSIX_PERMISSIONS and _PC_POSIX_SECURITY.
> This seems to contradict the documentation at
> https://cygwin.com/cygwin-ug-net/getconf.html:
> 
> "...getconf serves as a wrapper for the pathconf function, supporting the
> symbolic constants defined in the unistd.h header, without the _PC_ prefix."
> 
> If the omission of _PC_POSIX_PERMISSIONS and _PC_POSIX_SECURITY was just an
> oversight, I can add support for them along with my patch.

I don't know if that was just an oversight or deliberate (Yaakov?).
It wouldn't hurt to add all of them, I think.


Thanks,
Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer                 cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat