I usually don't write you guys, I follow the thread to see how development is going.
Just a note. The ls command is't quite right. Ls -lRC wil not recursively list the files and directories in verbose mode. The l flag seems to be ignored. -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Pierre A. Humblet Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2005 11:42 AM To: cygwin-patches@cygwin.com Subject: Re: [Patch]: mkdir -p and network drives ----- Original Message ----- From: "Corinna Vinschen" To: <cygwin-patches@cygwin.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2005 12:48 PM Subject: Re: [Patch]: mkdir -p and network drives > Hi Pierre, > > I don't see a reason why you moved telldir just a few lines up. > Any reasoning, perhaps together with a ChangeLog entry? Nope, it was an accidental cut and I pasted it back a few lines off. > > Why did you remove fhandler_cygdrive::telldir but not > fhandler_cygdrive::seekdir? Both are just calling their base class > variants. I am still working on fhandler_cygdrive. I stopped to keep the size of the patch small. > > - else if (isvirtual_dev (dev.devn) && fileattr == INVALID_FILE_ATTRIBUTES) > > - { > > - error = dev.devn == FH_NETDRIVE ? ENOSHARE : ENOENT; > > - return; > > - } > > I don't understand this one. What's the rational behind removing > these lines? - They won't work the day we support writing to the registry. - More generally, I think it's cleaner to do device specific error handling in the fhandlers, instead of adding conditionals in path.cc - In the case where one tries to create a file or directory on a virtual device, one gets EROFS with this patch, instead of ENOSHARE or ENOENT before. That seems more logical. Pierre
