On Thu, 3 Feb 2005, Jeff.Hodges wrote:
On Tue, Feb 01, 2005 at 11:43:04AM -0800, Jeff.Hodges wrote:
On Jan 31 12:25, Jeff.Hodges wrote:
corinna-cygwin said:
There's a patch in current Cygwin CVS which should solve the icon
problem.
Super. Tho, will fixing the icon
it'd be helpful to know in which package the cygwin symlink
functionality is materialized in, so as to watch for
appropriate update announcement(s). I suspect it's embodied
at least in both coreutils and cygwin1.dll, but am not sure.
might somone endeavor to answer this? thanks,
JeffH
On Tue, Feb 01, 2005 at 11:43:04AM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Jan 31 12:25, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
There's a patch in current Cygwin CVS which should solve the icon
problem.
Super. Tho, will fixing the icon problem also fix the
behavior
On Jan 31 12:25, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
There's a patch in current Cygwin CVS which should solve the icon
problem.
Super. Tho, will fixing the icon problem also fix the behavior dichotomy
between Explorer and Open/Save dialogs (which I noted in my
On Tue, Feb 01, 2005 at 11:43:04AM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 31 12:25, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
There's a patch in current Cygwin CVS which should solve the icon
problem.
Super. Tho, will fixing the icon problem also fix the behavior dichotomy
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
There's a patch in current Cygwin CVS which should solve the icon
problem.
Super. Tho, will fixing the icon problem also fix the behavior dichotomy
between Explorer and Open/Save dialogs (which I noted in my original posting
in this thread)?
If you want to use a
On Jan 31 12:25, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
There's a patch in current Cygwin CVS which should solve the icon
problem.
Super. Tho, will fixing the icon problem also fix the behavior dichotomy
between Explorer and Open/Save dialogs (which I noted in my original
On Jan 27 14:16, Jan Hlavacek wrote:
I am not on the list, but I hope this will get through. I came across
this discussion while I was searching for an answer to similar problem.
There are a couple of postings in the ML archives, all from this month,
which should explain the behaviour pretty
Hi,
I am not on the list, but I hope this will get through. I came across
this discussion while I was searching for an answer to similar problem.
Maybe describing my experience will help you figure out what is going
on. Unfortunately, I have absolutely no experience with windows
programming,
I'm glad that you're talking about us as a group. Anybody interested
in tracking that down?
I'm not in a position to hack code on this unfortunately, but I can offer to
test.
I suspect it's important in the longer term to track this down because they
(MSFT) ~could~ make further changes down
On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 08:25:26AM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm glad that you're talking about us as a group. Anybody interested
in tracking that down?
I'm not in a position to hack code on this unfortunately, but I can offer to
test.
I suspect it's important in the longer term to
I suspect it's important in the longer term to track this down because they
(MSFT) ~could~ make further changes down the road that break cygwin-created
symlinks altogether (from the windoze perspective), which'd more than just
annoying.
No, Microsoft is not going to break things so that
On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 10:33:47PM +0100, Sven K?hler wrote:
I suspect it's important in the longer term to track this down because
they (MSFT) ~could~ make further changes down the road that break
cygwin-created symlinks altogether (from the windoze perspective),
which'd more than just
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
He clearly complained about MS-Software that cannot handle
cygwin-created links, and you're talking about cygwin understand its
own symlinks
correct. thanks.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Apologies. I took the word altogether to mean completely but
obviously missed the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
If this were to come to pass and not be addressed by the cygwin
community, then it wouldn't make any sense to have the the default
(or even option) of creating cygwin symlinks as winsymlinks.
oops. add ...on XP and possibly derivatives thereof.
JeffH
--
On Jan 15 08:17, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Seems to me we ought to see if we can't update the symlink() impl such that
this is addressed. I'm betting there's some new attributes or whatever (as
Igor notes) that've been added to symlinks in XP and if we can figure out
what
that is, and
On Jan 14 20:05, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005, Jeff.Hodges wrote:
Mostly these are symlinks to directories which I use to more
conveniently traipse around my filesystem. This was true of all my
cygwin install/upgrades on Win2k from say 1999 thru 2004. The native Win
Thanks for looking at this Igor. Glad to know it isn't just me.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
And, lo and behold, on a plain WinXP SP1 (note, no SP2) I get the
same behavior.
aha. innaresting. Well, I installed vanilla XP and then copied over a buncha
directories from my old Win2k box, including
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005, Jeff.Hodges wrote:
I've searched this list and googled and all, and can't find anything
about this issue, so perhaps it's some cockpit error on my part.
Anyways, here's the issue/question...
cygwin symlinks (aka cygwin-created windows shortcuts) seem to work
19 matches
Mail list logo
