[ANNOUNCEMENT]: Important change to symbolic linkfunctionality

[Earnie Boyd]

John Paulson wrote:
> 
>    I like the proposal to unify Windows and Cygwin symlinks.  However, one
> minor problem can occur: under *nix I can have files with the extension
> .lnk, with no special semantics associated with it.  I can tar up a directory
> containing .lnk files on my *nix box and untar them on my cygwin box.  What
> happens to those files with the .lnk extension?  I think this will be another
> bit of Windows-vs-the-world festivity (as occurred with one source tarball
> recently which had a directory named "AUX").
> 
>    Even with that potential hassle, unification is the correct choice.
> 

Just for kicks, after reading this post, I did `touch foo.lnk' and have
a circular reference to foo.lnk.  The directory listing actually shows
the filename as foo.lnk.

I then decided to `cat << EOF > abc.lnk' and actually put data in the
file. This time the listing doesn't show a circular reference and cat
abc.lnk gives me the contents of the file.

Earnie.

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com


--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple