Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 09:29:12 +0300 (IDT) From: Eli Zaretskii X-Sender: eliz AT is To: pavenis AT lanet DOT lv cc: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: symlink() & is_v2_prog() question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk On Mon, 30 Aug 1999 pavenis AT lanet DOT lv wrote: > one may need to invoke non-DJGPP application from DJGPP one. > As results symlinks will work in one but not in another one > (example of non-DJGPP application is command.com) It's true in general, although rare in practice. Specifically, COMMAND.COM is almost *never* called, unless the application requests that explicitly. Perhaps `__spawnve' (or one of its subroutines) could copy the file(s) that are symlinks, if the program it is about to launch is a non-DJGPP one? That would require checking all the command-line arguments and all the inherited file handles. The copy-file simulation of symlinks doesn't have this problem, btw. > If we are going to support only part of functionality we have for > example in Linux, then something will still stay broken and > we'll still may have problems when running things that commes > from Unix. I don't think I understand this. Can you please elaborate?