On Jan 1, 2008, at 12:31 PM, Christiaan Hofman wrote: > Ho should we actually handle symlinks in linked files? Currently we > resolve those., I'm not sure if that's correct. It's inconsistent > with aliases.
After your last message, I've been wondering the same thing myself. Right now I'm not sure we're consistent even with aliases. IIRC we were resolving aliases for icons which was probably wrong. I think the NSWorkspace UTI resolution method shouldn't resolve aliases by default, either, but there was probably some reason for doing it that way. Maybe for sorting URLs. I guess the question is what we should move, the link (symlink or alias) or the target file? I suppose moving the link is the correct thing to do. > This applies both to whether the linked file is a > symlink or the document. Though perhaps the document URL is always > resolved? Also I'm not sure whether aliases resolve symlinks or could > keep aliases to a symlink. Certainly not resolving symlinks means we > can't use BDAlias, as it uses the wrong methods to create FSRefs. It looks like an alias to a symlink works in Finder, although that's kind of gross. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Bibdesk-develop mailing list Bibdesk-develop@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bibdesk-develop
