Mail Archives: cygwin/1999/11/26/03:10:49
Hi, Donald-
I've found that ls -l (lowercase 'l') works quite well with b20.1- I can't
speak for the 1.0 CD version, however. Since ls -L you suggest below
DOESN'T work with b20.1, I think it might prove to be the same under 1.0...
:-)
da Baron
>From: "Donald E. Hammond" <dhammond AT nac DOT net>
>To: "Halim, Salman" <salman AT bluestone DOT com>
>CC: "'cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com '" <cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>
>Subject: Re: resolving symbolic links
>Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 09:11:19 -0500
>
>Salman -
>
>ls -L should work, I think, but doesn't seem to in my 1.0 CD
>installation. Don't know if it's a bug, or misunderstanding on my
>part. Try: 'find /tmp -printf %l' (or -printf "%l\n"), which seems to
>work.
>
>Hope that helps.
>
> - Don
>
>
>
>Halim, Salman wrote:
> >
> > hi,
> >
> > what's a good way to find out (programmatically; either through a
>command or
> > a piped series of commands or a function), in bash (if relevant), the
>actual
> > path pointed to by a symbolic link. for example, i have /tmp pointing
>to
> > c:\temp -- how can i get 'c:\temp' as output given '/tmp' as input? i
> > thought of ls -al /tmp | cut -d'>' -f 2- but that seems a bit of a
>kludge. .
> > .
> >
>
>--
>Want to unsubscribe from this list?
>Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
>
>
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
- Raw text -