On Mar  9 07:48, L A Walsh wrote:
> Andrey Repin wrote:
> > I would argue against all junctions being treated blindly.
> > The difference with bind mounts in Linux is that in Linux you don't have
> > the
> > information available within the filesystem itself, and have no other
> > option,
> > than to treat them as regular directories.
> > Only direct volume junctions cause an issue, and this is what should be
> > fixed,
> > if possible, not sidetracked with questionable workarounds.
> ----
> 	Could you describe the benefits of your proposed solution?
> 
> 	You do know that MS originally called junctions "mountpoints",
> right?  So why would cygwin treating them as such be a "questionable
> workaround"?

He's right.  The mount point handling in Cygwin is based on the
in-memory mount table.  There's no reasonable way to fake some
reparse point to look like a mount point.  We can either handle it
as normal dir, or as symlink.  Handling it as normal dir is 
problematic in terms of find/rsync etc, bacause the cross-device
check would fail and files are potentially visited multiple times.


Corinna

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