This is the mail archive of the cygwin@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the Cygwin project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: New symlinks.


On Tue, Feb 27, 2001 at 05:17:30PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>On Tue, Feb 27, 2001 at 10:40:26AM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> I *really* don't think that the .lnk extension should show up when
>> doing an "ls -l" as was suggested in another post.  That is just an
>> open invitation to increasing mailing list traffic: "How do I get rid
>> of the .lnk extension when I create symlinks????  It doesn't do this
>> on Linux."
>> 
>> I am, as always, more concerned about supporting this feature in
>> the long run.  If allowing foo.lnk to be referenced explicitly causes
>> even one person confusion, I don't think that it is worth it.  It
>> is certainly non-UNIX behavior.
>
>I think it's correct behaviour. Cygwin doesn't show the .lnk
>suffix by itself but nevertheless, to return a `file not found'
>on `ls foo.lnk' wouldn't be correct. It's simply the truth:
>The file `foo.lnk' exists and is a symlink.

Again, it is surprising behavior.  Such a file would not exist on UNIX.
I personally think that we should hide implementation details like
"Oh yeah, we added a .lnk extension to all of our symbolic links"
from the user.  There is no reason for them to know or care about
this detail.

cgf

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


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]