This is the mail archive of the
cygwin
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: Path processing bug
- From: Christopher Faylor <cgf-no-personal-reply-please at cygwin dot com>
- To: cygwin at cygwin dot com
- Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2005 23:17:15 -0400
- Subject: Re: Path processing bug
- References: <20050822002413.GE12465@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> <20050822025905.7896213C83C@cgf.cx>
- Reply-to: cygwin at cygwin dot com
On Sun, Aug 21, 2005 at 09:58:40PM -0500, Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:
>Cgf wrote:
>
>[snip]
>
>> I think it's a pretty hard problem and I really don't care
>> about POSIX
>
>??? This must be a typo, or you wouldn't be here.
You're right. It wasn't a typo but it was too strongly stated. I
really don't care about POSIX in this case because I don't care about
slavish adherence to POSIX standards at the expense of decreasing cygwin
performance, adding a lot of complexity, or removing functionality.
For example, I don't want to make Cygwin 1% slower so that a corner case
problem like foo/../bar will work correctly and I don't want to remove
functionality from 'tar' because the 't' option to fopen() isn't
mentioned by POSIX.
And, although I use SUSv3 as a reference, when I'm looking for
compatibility, I really only care about how things work on linux. If
there is a conflict between POSIX and linux, then linux wins, unless
there is a really compelling case otherwise. Luckily, usually linux
and SUSv3 agree.
cgf
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/