This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-developers
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: utility to update existing cygwin symlinks to native format? (was Re: native symlink)
- From: Christopher Faylor <cgf-use-the-mailinglist-please at cygwin dot com>
- To: cygwin-developers at cygwin dot com
- Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 20:25:48 -0400
- Subject: Re: utility to update existing cygwin symlinks to native format? (was Re: native symlink)
- References: <20130403152907 dot GD2468 at calimero dot vinschen dot de> <20130424103450 dot GM26397 at calimero dot vinschen dot de> <5177CABF dot 8040406 at openafs dot org> <20130424125043 dot GA18673 at calimero dot vinschen dot de> <51781CA4 dot 3040103 at openafs dot org> <20130424181412 dot GB26397 at calimero dot vinschen dot de> <3B3671F5-EBFE-480B-B592-90BA2270BDA6 at mac dot com> <42E7B9C6-1A6A-43D7-84B3-AEDD25EF4507 at mac dot com> <517F061D dot 5080201 at cygwin dot com> <671E245A-BDCD-4F46-90B7-9E73301126C1 at mac dot com>
- Reply-to: cygwin-developers at cygwin dot com
On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 04:49:33PM -0700, James Gregurich wrote:
>
>
>On Apr 29, 2013, at 4:45 PM, "Larry Hall (Cygwin Developers)" wrote:
>
>> On 4/29/2013 6:04 PM, James Gregurich wrote:
>>> I have not gotten a response to this question yet. I'd like to get into
>>> a position to roll this version of cygwin out so that we can use it daily and
>>> look for glitches, but I do need the ability to upgrade existing symlinks
>>> before that is feasible. Is there an answer to my question?
>>
>> You'll have to wait until Corinna returns from vacation at least for the
>> answer to whether or not this has been done already. I can't say if
>> you've inspired Corinna (or someone else) to implement this for you.
>> If not, you may have to create your own utility for this part.
>
>ok. thanks for the info
>
>The utility that I wrote for myself depends upon an exposed API
>function in path.cc since all the logic to handle the internal format
>of the cygwin symlink file is contained in path.cc. I could easily
>write one for myself if such a function were exposed as a public API.
>I'd just need the specs to use the call.
If you're asking "Did Corinna write a utility to do this?" the answer
is extremely likely to be "No" since she would have mentioned it if
she had.
If you're asking "Will Corinna write a utility to do this?" I suspect
that the answer is likely also "No".
cgf