Re: lstat on FAT - Was: Problem with find on FAT drives

["Pierre A. Humblet" <pierre dot humblet at ieee dot org>]

On Wed, Mar 24, 2004 at 03:56:44PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 24, 2004 at 02:52:34PM -0500, Volker Quetschke wrote:
> >Hi Corinna,
> >
> >>>Looks pretty similar to me, but I was looking for the following:
> >>>
> >>>$ ls -ldin .\\tmp ./tmp
> >>>2919335057    drwxr-xr-x 4 1006   513         0 Mar 10 13:06 ./tmp/
> >>>2805415844195 drwxr-xr-x 4 1006   513         0 Mar 10 13:06 .\tmp/
> >>>
> >>>I came to that "program" by reducing the find soure to the bare
> >>>minimum to show that problem.
> >>>
> >>>So again, is this an expected/tolerated behaviour?
> >>
> >>Yes, it's by design.  The answer is "don't use DOS paths".
> >
> >It's nice to be mean, isn't it?
> 
> How about some clarification: "Don't use DOS paths if you want
> consistent i-nodes?"
> 
> You're welcome to use DOS paths if you want.  You just can't expect
> UNIX-style behavior from them.

I also had a look at the code and reached pretty much the same conclusion
as Volker. Replacing all 'isslash (*src)' and 'isslash (src[x])' in
normalize_posix_path by "isdirsep ()" would yield more consistent results.
I know this code is delicate but the possible drawback isn't obvious.

Pierre

--
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/