X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2009 22:31:58 -0500 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: NTFS Symlinks (reparse point) redux Message-ID: <20091106033157.GA30410@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com References: <4AF357E1 DOT 4010106 AT tlinx DOT org> <20091105230119 DOT GB2699 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <4AF39229 DOT 6050204 AT tlinx DOT org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4AF39229.6050204@tlinx.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: 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 Thu, Nov 05, 2009 at 07:04:09PM -0800, Linda Walsh wrote: >Christopher Faylor wrote: >>>>>> 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. >>> ----- >>> They don't have to..."sorta": Under the User-rights assignment plugin, >>> where you assign what users/groups have what priviledges, you can >>> 'allow' USERS, or ALL ATHENTICATED USERS to have the priviledge. Then >>> it doesn't require them to be an Administrator to use. >> >> No one said "Administrator". Corinna said "elevated privileges". You >> can't expect that anyone who wants to use a symlink will be capable of >> getting additional rights. > >That's why I said "sorta"...if a user is on their own system, or if an >administrator ok's it, they could set up their system to allow >"symlinks" for normal users. > >I mean it is a normal, non-privileged function in linux, it might >become that in the NT world -- its just that now no one is used to it, >and to many tools, the 'symlinks' look like regular files or >directories -- i.e. the are 'hard' to see. It's only been on Vista >that I now see the reparse points I was already using in XP, now >showing up with the little arrow (symlink symbol). You're talking about doing a lot of work for something that now requires the user to do something special but "might become that in the NT world". And, there's still the issue of symlinks not handling POSIX paths. How would you handle a symlink to a device or to something in /proc? What do you do when an MS-DOS path symlink points to a mount point and the mount point changes? cgf -- 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