This is the mail archive of the cygwin-developers mailing list for the Cygwin project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Updated: vim-7.3.003-1


On Aug 20 14:41, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 08:35:06PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >On Aug 20 11:39, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> >> Did we ever come to a consensus on what to do with the Cygwin cwd stuff?
> >> It sounded like people were reluctantly agreeing with my reluctant
> >> proposal to not set the windows cwd to the pipe pseudo-location unless
> >> chdir was explicitly called.
> >
> >I'm not really convinced that this is a good solution.  It is somewhat
> >half-half, sticking to Win32 backward compatibility but not quite.  This
> >hits Cygwin applications in the back in the first place.  How many POSIX
> >tools actually call chdir?  Most shells, but otherwise?
> 
> I can't believe that I'm arguing for the Windows API but to counter the
> argument:

I'm filled with indignation!  Go, stand in the corner for the rest of
this lesson!

> How many POSIX applications are confused by the inability to
> delete the current directory?

Honestly?  I don't know.  I don't think it's much of a problem that an
application might try to slip its CWD under its own feet.  What's more
vexing is the inability to remove a directory at all, just because some
other process holds a handle without FILE_SHARE_DELETE as CWD.  Very
non-Linux.

Still honestly, I don't think that this is much of a problem per se.
But it's really infuriating that we have to compromise a Linux-like
capability for a handful of "hybrid" apps, which can simply call
cygwin_internal if it's really necessary.

> I like that Cygwin allows you to do this
> now but I'm wondering how much pain we'll be giving to previously
> working hybrid Cygwin applications.

<Dr. Chaos mode>
Heh heh heh.
</Dr. Chaos mode>

> >Since the workaround I created originally doesn't work since Vista
> >anyway, we keep full Win32 backward compatibility and just give up
> >on the Linux-like capability to rename or remove a CWD, while still
> >maintaining POSIX compatibility.
> 
> Which workaround doesn't work on Vista?  The one in 1.7.6?

No, the one up to 1.7.5.  Trrying to replace the CWD handle in the PEB.


Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader          cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]