X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Message-ID: <4AE938D5.20500@cygwin.com> Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 02:40:21 -0400 From: "Larry Hall (Cygwin)" Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.1.21) Gecko/20090320 Remi/2.0.0.21-1.fc8.remi Lightning/0.9 Thunderbird/2.0.0.21 Mnenhy/0.7.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: Symbolic links on NTFS with real symbolic links References: <003501ca5858$70595730$510c0590$@Mowbray AT calgacus DOT com> In-Reply-To: <003501ca5858$70595730$510c0590$@Mowbray@calgacus.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com On 10/29/2009 01:26 AM, Neil Mowbray wrote: > Dear Folks, > > On NTFS systems that support real symbolic links (eg those with Vista) > the comand ln -s does *not* create a native symbolic link merely an old > style shortcut. > > Will ln -s be chansed to support native symbolic links? No, not until, at least, native symbolic links don't require elevated privileges to use. > Also rm removes the target of the symbolic link not the link file. > Is this what you want? Please provide a simple test case with the associated information requested by . I cannot reproduce this behavior. Of course, I'm using Cygwin 1.7 on Windows 7. You may want to see if you can reproduce the behavior on 1.7 before reporting it though, since 1.5 isn't going to be updated anymore. FWIW, if you don't care for the Windows shortcut-style symlinks, my guess is you'll be less enthused with the "new" special text file that 1.7 uses. Them's the breaks. ;-) -- Larry Hall http://www.rfk.com RFK Partners, Inc. (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office 216 Dalton Rd. (508) 893-9889 - FAX Holliston, MA 01746 _____________________________________________________________________ A: Yes. > Q: Are you sure? >> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. >>> Q: Why is top posting annoying in email? -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple