From: papresco@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca (Paul Prescod) Subject: Re: Absolute file-path under bash (cygwin32) 19 Apr 1997 09:35:04 -0700 Approved: cygnus.gnu-win32@cygnus.com Distribution: cygnus Message-ID: <335876B2.D805DF89.cygnus.gnu-win32@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca> References: <199704170243.TAA05434@tcp.com> <3356C745.2E4A@netcom.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.0b3 [en] (Win95; I) Original-To: Jim Balter Original-CC: scott@statsci.com, Hawkeye , jeffdb@netzone.com, gnu-win32@cygnus.com X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Original-Sender: owner-gnu-win32@cygnus.com Jim Balter wrote: > This discussion has become rather confused. The topic *was* > having *non*-cygwin programs understand *unix* path names, by, > for instance hacking bash (I have faith that cygnus won't do this). Threads shift. The question now is how to have a unified interface for passing paths to programs. Do you feel that this is not a problem worth solving or that there is a better solution than changing bash? > b17 already groks DOS paths (device:, backslash); b18 will handle UNC > paths (paths starting with double backslash). Wouldn't that be a quadruple backslash (at least in bash)? Does that mean that Cygwin apps will understand paths with backslashes in them or that there is now a way to specify UNC paths so that Unix programs can understand them -- but using a different syntax than you would use for Windows programs. Paul Prescod - For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to "gnu-win32-request@cygnus.com" with one line of text: "help".