This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
RE: Why do symlinks need to be system files
- From: "Mark R." <mcr2z at cs dot virginia dot edu>
- To: <cygwin at cygwin dot com>
- Cc: "'Gary R. Van Sickle'" <g dot r dot vansickle at worldnet dot att dot net>
- Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 15:38:30 -0400
- Subject: RE: Why do symlinks need to be system files
It turns out that my problem has been solved by ondemand software. They
purchased the Win-Install program from Veritas a while ago. With the release
of Windows Server 2003, they've released Win Install LE 2003.
This version actually correctly recognizes no-extension files with the
system flag and preserves it.
Off to build a working version. Thanks for the help everyone.
From: Larry Hall [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 10:01 AM
To: Mark R.
Cc: 'Gary R. Van Sickle'; email@example.com
Subject: Re: Why do symlinks need to be system files
Mark R. wrote:
> That does make sense. I've played around with using ln -s to create my
> own symlinks. The odd thing is that these are all being created as
> shortcuts vs this other method. Now that I'm in the "I'm just curious"
> mode - Does anyone know why the two different methods are used?
One is method is "old" and one is "new". Setup uses the "old" method.
and look for '(no)winsymlinks'. You too can use the "old" method if you
Larry Hall http://www.rfk.com
RFK Partners, Inc. (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office
838 Washington Street (508) 893-9889 - FAX
Holliston, MA 01746
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html