From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15932 invoked by alias); 13 Jun 2018 10:14:23 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Received: (qmail 15863 invoked by uid 89); 13 Jun 2018 10:14:18 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=shares, urge, whoever, mounted X-HELO: mout.gmx.net Received: from mout.gmx.net (HELO mout.gmx.net) (212.227.15.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Wed, 13 Jun 2018 10:14:16 +0000 Received: from [62.225.77.164] ([62.225.77.164]) by 3c-app-gmx-bs06.server.lan (via HTTP); Wed, 13 Jun 2018 12:14:13 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: From: "Sven Eden" To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: Problematic interpretion of paths starting with double slashes Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 13:29:00 -0000 Sensitivity: Normal In-Reply-To: <20180613080953.GR7851@calimero.vinschen.de> References: <87efhbdbaz.fsf@Rainer.invalid> <20180613080953.GR7851@calimero.vinschen.de> X-UI-Message-Type: mail X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2018-06/txt/msg00142.txt.bz2 > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 13. Juni 2018 um 10:09 Uhr > Von: "Corinna Vinschen" > On Jun 12 22:01, Achim Gratz wrote: > > Sven Eden writes: > > > Doing a simple stat on / if (and only if) the UNC lookup > > > fails, does not endanger anything. It wouldn't break > > > anything or do any other damage. Besides from adding an > > > additional <0.01s lag to any failed access that *really* > > > meant a network share. > > > > > > So no. Adding this tiny extra functionality wouldn't break > > > anything for anybody, but allowed the usage of software that > > > relies on the non-cygwin behaviour. (And is outside the > > > users control.) > > > > Well, it does break things if both > > > > //this/or/that > > /this/or/that > > > > exist and then at some point host "this" becomes unreachable. So I'd > > keep //unc/path to mean just that on principle. > > ACK > True, if /this isn't just a mount point for //this, meaning that the "that"s are two different files. Apart from the urge to question the sanity of anybody setting something up like that, I see that this is a serious objection to consider. I mean, seriously, something like that *is* prone to typos, and whoever does that will end up manipulating/using the wrong file rather often anyway. Which leads to the point that such a setup makes injecting not mounted network shares like that quite dangerous... Just my thoughts... Doesn't matter anymore anyway, as my main question of interest was answered. ;-) Sven -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple