Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-developers-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-developers-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-developers/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-developers-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-developers-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
Date:	Mon, 10 Mar 2003 11:16:28 -0500
From:	Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To:	cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: unlink
Message-ID:	<20030310161628.GG23549@redhat.com>
Reply-To:	cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
References:	<3E6CB0FA DOT 2312CCD0 AT ieee DOT org>
Mime-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<3E6CB0FA.2312CCD0@ieee.org>
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.5.1i

On Mon, Mar 10, 2003 at 10:36:26AM -0500, Pierre A. Humblet wrote:
>Chris,
>
>It's a great idea to use FILE_FLAG_DELETE_ON_CLOSE for unlink,
>but a few bells rang when I read the code.

AFAIK, I didn't add anything here.  I just changed the order.  unlink
has always used FILE_FLAG_DELETE_ON_CLOSE.

>2) Why is wincap.has_delete_on_close needed?
>
>All Windows versions have delete_on_close capability. This is a snippet
>on WinME with a file on a shared directory mounted on Win98.

It doesn't work quite right on Windows 98.  I tested it extensively a
while ago and it seemed unreliable.  Maybe it is ok in the current incarnation.
I guess I could remove that test and see if anyone hollers.

>3) I don't understand why there are so many SetFileAttributes after CreateFile
>   succeeds. If the file will be deleted, its attributes are don't care.

Think 'hard links'.

cgf

- Raw text -