Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Date:	Sat, 24 Feb 2001 19:39:56 -0500
From:	Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT]: Important change to symbolic link functionali ty
Message-ID:	<20010224193956.E7547@redhat.com>
Reply-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References:	<20010222215326 DOT A908 AT cygbert DOT vinschen DOT de>; <20010224183009 DOT B6893 AT redhat DOT com> <3A97DFAB DOT 22135 DOT A32889 AT localhost>
Mime-Version:	1.0
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.3.11i
In-Reply-To:	<3A97DFAB.22135.A32889@localhost>; from pgarceau@qwest.net on Sat, Feb 24, 2001 at 04:22:03PM -0800

On Sat, Feb 24, 2001 at 04:22:03PM -0800, Paul Garceau wrote:
>
>
>On 24 Feb 2001, at 18:30, the Illustrious Christopher Faylor wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 09:53:26PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>> >> I just thought of another problem though -- if I put together a
>> >> distro tarball that contains symlinks, the dos paths will match MY
>> >> system, and not the user's system.  Unless part of the postinstall
>> >> script is to run fix-symlinks on the symlinks included in the
>> >> installed package...
>> >
>> >No. Obviously not. Since Cygwin tar reads and saves the POSIX path in
>> >the tarball, it is absolutely correctly recreated when unpacked on the
>> >target system even when the links are absolute links, say
>> >/usr/include/foo or alike.
>> >
>> >Consider - it's _not_ the *.lnk file which is saved in the tarball but
>> >the attribute to be a symlink. You would be right in case of using
>> >WinZip when creating an archive. But that's unfair because it's only a
>> >native Windows tool...
>> 
>> I wonder how WinZip handles .lnk files anyway?  Does it just restore
>> them "as is"?
>
>	Depends on how you add the .lnk file to the archive.  This is what 
>happened when I tested this.
>
>Archiving:
>	a) adding directly to a zip file using "Add to WinZip Archive", 
>converts the .lnk file  to a .bat file (cygwin.lnk becomes cygwin.bat).
>	b) Opening a WinZip archive, and then copying the .lnk file to the 
>archive leaves the file as is (cygwin.lnk remains cygwin.lnk).
>
>De-archiving:
>
>	In a) above, when extracted using "extract" option, "cygwin.bat" stays 
>"cygwin.bat".
>	In b) above, when extracting using WinZip "extract" option, 
>"cygwin.lnk" stays "cygwin.lnk" and may be launched normally.

Interesting.  I wonder if this will be a FAQ someday.

From what you're describing it sounds like in at least one scenario, it will
be possible to produce invalid (as in pointing to nowhere) .lnk files with
winzip.  I guess that's to be expected.

cgf

--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -