Re: ln and mkshortcut inconsistent in handling of .exe extension

2003-10-01 Thread Christopher Faylor
On Tue, Sep 30, 2003 at 05:15:48PM -0400, Matt Swift wrote: >That's only part of the stated goals of 'ln'. When CYGWIN contains >"winsymlinks" (or more accurately, does not contain "nowinsymlinks" >since "winsymlinks" is the stated default), symbolic links are supposed >to function both as Cygwin

Re: ln and mkshortcut inconsistent in handling of .exe extension

2003-10-01 Thread Larry Hall
At 05:15 PM 9/30/2003, Matt Swift you wrote: >>> "L" == Larry wrote: > >L> If you want/need a Windows-style shortcut with all the >L> semantics that implies, use 'mkshortuct'. Is that the point >L> you were missing? > >I am not asking for "all the semantics", just the ones that are >d

Re: ln and mkshortcut inconsistent in handling of .exe extension

2003-09-30 Thread Matt Swift
>> "L" == Larry wrote: L> If you want/need a Windows-style shortcut with all the L> semantics that implies, use 'mkshortuct'. Is that the point L> you were missing? I am not asking for "all the semantics", just the ones that are documented (user guide 3.5) to exist for all Cygwin sy

Re: ln and mkshortcut inconsistent in handling of .exe extension

2003-09-30 Thread Larry Hall
At 06:02 PM 9/29/2003, Matt Swift you wrote: >>> "L" == Larry wrote: > >L> 'ln' and 'mkshortcut' have different behavior for a reason. See >L> . >L> The difference is why 'mkshortcut' exists. Otherwise, we'd just have >

Re: ln and mkshortcut inconsistent in handling of .exe extension

2003-09-29 Thread Matt Swift
>> "L" == Larry wrote: L> 'ln' and 'mkshortcut' have different behavior for a reason. See L> . L> The difference is why 'mkshortcut' exists. Otherwise, we'd just have L> 'ln' (which is all we had for quite some tim

Re: ln and mkshortcut inconsistent in handling of .exe extension

2003-09-29 Thread Christopher Faylor
On Mon, Sep 29, 2003 at 02:23:23PM -0400, Matt Swift wrote: >The following shell transcript demonstrates that `ln' does not handle >the .exe extension gracefully, like mkshortcut does. Correct. It is not intended to. -- Please use the resources at cygwin.com rather than sending personal email. Sp

Re: ln and mkshortcut inconsistent in handling of .exe extension

2003-09-29 Thread Larry Hall
At 02:23 PM 9/29/2003, Matt Swift you wrote: > 2) The files "symlink-to-base" "symlink-to-base.exe" should have the > .exe extension silently added to the Windows shortcut target: at > present, the files are not valid Windows shortcuts (they appear > to Windows Explorer as a shortcut,

ln and mkshortcut inconsistent in handling of .exe extension

2003-09-29 Thread Matt Swift
The following shell transcript demonstrates that `ln' does not handle the .exe extension gracefully, like mkshortcut does. I believe graceful behavior would require the following changes: 1) `ln' would not give the two errors below when trying to create "hardlink-to-base" and "hardlink-to-