Added some interesting functionality to my cygwin sandbox

Christopher Faylor
Wed Jul 2 17:05:00 GMT 2003

On Wed, Jul 02, 2003 at 06:47:51PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>On Wed, Jul 02, 2003 at 11:24:58AM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 02, 2003 at 11:15:33AM -0400, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
>> >Why?  I just tried it on Linux, and could not create a symlink to an empty
>> >path.  If we added some logic to link processing code in Cygwin to revert
>> >to the Win32 path if the POSIX path is empty, I don't see any reason why
>> >this woulnd't work...  It won't even be a slowdown for normal symlinks,
>> >since we'd only do this bit of logic if we failed to open the POSIX path.
>> I really like this idea.  Corinna?  The symlink stuff is your code.  What
>> do you think?
>Basically it's a good idea.   Since we're talking about /cygdrive paths
>only, we can be sure the path is absolute so no objections against
>falling back to the Windows path component of the shortcut.  The older
>code in the (now deprecated) file shortcut.c already read the Windows
>path from the shortcut but then it haven't been used later on.  But how
>would we solve that with the old symlink style?  Giving the path as
>Windows path in the file?

I think we just don't worry about it for old symlinks

>> (Of course, you can *always* use the mount table for all of this.  I wonder
>> if we should just be using the mount table here.)
>I don't understand how the mount table comes into play here.  Could you
>describe what you have in mind?

mount c:/windows /windows

>Personally I don't like having a big mount table for all sorts of weird
>stuff.  I'd like to keep it clean and small.

I know what you mean but the mount table is supposed to be the guaranteed
mapping between windows and unix paths so...


More information about the Cygwin-developers mailing list