> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 13. Juni 2018 um 10:09 Uhr > Von: "Corinna Vinschen" <corinna-cyg...@cygwin.com> > On Jun 12 22:01, Achim Gratz wrote: > > Sven Eden writes: > > > Doing a simple stat on / if (and only if) the UNC lookup > > > fails, does not endanger anything. It wouldn't break > > > anything or do any other damage. Besides from adding an > > > additional <0.01s lag to any failed access that *really* > > > meant a network share. > > > > > > So no. Adding this tiny extra functionality wouldn't break > > > anything for anybody, but allowed the usage of software that > > > relies on the non-cygwin behaviour. (And is outside the > > > users control.) > > > > Well, it does break things if both > > > > //this/or/that > > /this/or/that > > > > exist and then at some point host "this" becomes unreachable. So I'd > > keep //unc/path to mean just that on principle. > > ACK >
True, if /this isn't just a mount point for //this, meaning that the "that"s are two different files. Apart from the urge to question the sanity of anybody setting something up like that, I see that this is a serious objection to consider. I mean, seriously, something like that *is* prone to typos, and whoever does that will end up manipulating/using the wrong file rather often anyway. Which leads to the point that such a setup makes injecting not mounted network shares like that quite dangerous... Just my thoughts... Doesn't matter anymore anyway, as my main question of interest was answered. ;-) Sven -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
