UNC and POSIX paths

Christopher Faylor cgf-use-the-mailinglist-please@cygwin.com
Tue Jun 18 14:37:00 GMT 2013

On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 10:30:09AM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 12:26:32PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>>On Jun 17 22:47, gmt@malth.us wrote:
>>> On Mon, 17 Jun 2013, at 21:42, Christopher Faylor thusly quipped:
>>> > On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 07:18:12PM -0700, gmt@malth.us wrote:
>>> >> BTW, along the same lines, I stated previously it would break
>>> >> http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=gnulib.git;a=blob_plain;f=m4/doub
>>> >> le-sl ash-root.m4.  Turns out I was wrong, the m4 has a hard-coded list
>>> >> of platforms.  So, I have to say, I can't think of one technical or
>>> >> merit-based reason this shouldn't be done, aside from the fact that
>>> >> it's annoying to hear it endlessly brought up on the mailing list (a
>>> >> problem which an implementation would, in fact, solve, not exacerbate).
>>> > 
>>> > I can't quite follow the logic here but if you're saying that if we no
>>> longer
>>> > treated // as /, people who want to use //usr/local/bin would not
>>> complain,
>>> > you're right.  That doesn't mean that a whole new class of complainer
>>> would not
>>> > show up, however.
>>> > 
>>> > I can say with absolute certainty that there is one person who would
>>> complain.
>>> I was imagining a less intrusive hypothetical approach.
>>> For example, perhaps a CYGWIN=nounc flag that would simply turn the feature
>>> off, or a way to deactivate in fstab -- in short, anything reversible, and,
>>> by default, preserving the existing behavior.  Prune-grafting "//" to "/smb"
>>> might have been a good idea had it been done at cygwin's inception, but I
>>> think it's probably too late now.
>>A mount table approach along the lines of the cygdrive prefix handling
>>might not be such a bad thing, after all.  Something along these lines
>>  none /mnt cygdrive binary,posix=0,user 0 0
>>  none /unc uncdrive binary,posix=0 0 0
>>This would also fix the somewhat special feature that unc paths get the
>>same default flag treatment as cygdrive paths.
>That's what I was proposing earlier in the thread.  It's a SHTDI
>proposal, of course.

And, it nontrivially complicates path handling since we'd have to make
decisions about whether to honor // or not.

If we do consider this, I think we should take a step back and think
about revamping path handling to allow hooks for things like /dev,
/proc, /cygdrive rather than having to special case them.


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

More information about the Cygwin mailing list