Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@sourceware.cygnus.com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@sources.redhat.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@sources.redhat.com Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2001 14:39:28 +0200 Message-Id: <200103021239.OAA03969@linux.> From: "Ehud Karni" To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: New symlinks. In-reply-to: <20010228183811.B5603@redhat.com> (message from Christopher Faylor on Wed, 28 Feb 2001 18:38:11 -0500) Organization: Simon & Wiesel Insurance agency Reply-to: ehud@unix.simonwiesel.co.il References: <17B78BDF120BD411B70100500422FC6309E220@IIS000> <200102281857.UAA05162@linux.> <20010228183811.B5603@redhat.com> X-Mailer: Emacs 20.7.1 rmail (send-msg 1.104) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Wed, 28 Feb 2001 18:38:11 -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote: > > For what gain? So that users can create symlinks that could be used > from Windows? I am wondering if the gain is worth the price. The gain is use of Cygwin links by Windows program (e.g. NTemacs) and vice versa. The real problem of Windows .lnk files (within Windows use) is that even though you can make link to a directory, you can not really use it. Unlike UNIX, you can not use .lnk files as middle part of path, it may only be used as the terminating part (basename) of a path. So maybe, after all, the use of .lnk files for sym-links is not such a great advantage. Ehud. BTW. I read every mail on this list (that reached my mailbox) since 2000-11-02. -- @@@@@@ @@@ @@@@@@ @ @ Ehud Karni Simon & Wiesel Insurance agency @ @ @ @@ @ Tel: +972-3-6212-757 Fax: +972-3-6292-544 @ @ @ @ @ @@ (USA) Fax and voice mail: 1-815-5509341 @ @ @ @ @ @ Better Safe Than Sorry http://www.simonwiesel.co.il mailto:ehud@unix.simonwiesel.co.il -- Want to unsubscribe from this list? Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple