Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: Unwanted .exe appended to symlinks From: fergus Reply-To: fergus@bonhard.uklinux.net To: cygwin@cygwin.com Cc: Eric Blake , fergus In-Reply-To: <42CFD190.2060109@byu.net> References: <1120880636.6400.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <42CFD190.2060109@byu.net> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2005 18:00:28 +0100 Message-Id: <1120928428.5677.18.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Thanks for your very rapid and informative responses, and also the suggestions and references http://cygwin.com/faq/faq_toc.html#TOC53) (How can I access other drives?) to using mounts rather than symlinks. Alol the same I've got a small preference for ln -s /cygdrive/h h over mkdir /h; mount -fsb h:/ /h which is probably easily addressed, but it is as follows. Both instructions are intended to be issue-once-only. With the former arrangement (symlinks) the command find / (usually with qualifications of course) finds only folders on the root filesystem. If I want to include devices then additionally I mkdir /cygdrive and lo! the command find / includes all the linked devices. Whereas, with the latter arrangement (mounts) the command find / always includes the mounted devices; not usually, or certainly not often, what I want. (I know these behaviours are as easily modified by unmounting/ remounting drives as by removing/ recreating links, and that mount-ing more accurately mimics what is done in Unix, but I just happen to like the symlink approach. I'm not saying it's better, in fact I imagine there are many reasons why it isn't.) Fergus -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/