Starting some notes on large paths... what's the right place?(Re: large paths in cygwin.)

Robert North
Tue Jul 10 22:25:00 GMT 2007

Brian Dessent wrote:
> wrote:
>> When will Cygwin get the ability to use large paths?
>> What are the roadblocks to Cygwin getting this feature?
> The small limit comes from the ANSI version of the Win32 API.  In order
> to be free of the limit Cygwin would have to consistently use the
> unicode versions of all Win32 API calls.  And to do that right[*] means
> converting Cygwin to store all paths as UCS-2 internally rather than
> simple char arrays, which means updating/fixing any code that handles
> paths, of which there is a lot (and some of it quite hairy.)
>> I've been using rsync in Cygwin, and hit the limits of windows ASCII
>> file names.
> Yes, it sucks.
>> I've seen some discussion about Cygwin getting 2^15 char long paths, but
>> it doesn't appear to be present in current release Cygwin, or on CVS.
> It's a lot of work.

Thanks for the reply Brian, I don't doubt it's a lot of work, but I'd 
like to make the work a little easier for whoever fixes this problem.

As I've investigated a little previous comments about large paths in 
cygwin, I'm going to do a little work on trying to summarize previous 
commentary on the subject, so as to make it easier for any developer 
approaching this problem to understand what they're taking on.

If I have time I may investigate what locations in code need to be 
changed, and technical details of possible internal UCS-2 (Or is that 
UTF16 ) implementations.

Ideally I'd like to place this kind of thing in a cygwin wiki,
but as Cygwin doesn't have one,  my preference is to place the notes in 
this mailing list, where they will be searchable.
Is this a good idea?
Is there a better place to put them?
--such as the developer's list?

Unsubscribe info:
Problem reports:

More information about the Cygwin mailing list