Re: //c - Ouch!

["Larry Hall (RFK Partners, Inc)" <lhall at rfk dot com>]

At 11:34 AM 9/26/2001, Keith Starsmeare wrote:
> > The problems you state are exactly the reasons for removing this syntax
> > for accessing drives.  It's too dangerous and problematic.
>
>As cgf was saying the other day, small incremental changes are often more
>acceptable in open source projects. Maybe the cygwin dll should have gone
>through  a six month period whereby //c was broken completely and then
>repaired to recognise UNC paths rather than local drives.
>
>I do know that the //c provided such a useful way to describe a local drive
>without referring to back slashes that it has been incorporated into other
>Windows based products (some Analog Devices command line tools for example).
>
>It's just that the implications will effect a lot of users and the release
>note (http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-announce/2001/msg00112.html) has it
>mentioned as the fifth item under "User level change overview".
>
>I'm sorry to stir this up again, but I think this needs to be in big bold
>flashing letters!



Everyone's entitled to an opinion. ;-)

I'm not suggesting that your idea is bad.  Indeed, it certainly does have
merits.  However, like you, I wouldn't know where to put this so that it
would address the need.  There's so many ways to access the software that
any one place is probably not good enough.  I may be pessimistic about this
but my guess is no matter what might be done, queries about this change 
will still come to this list, despite the fact that the syntax has been
deprecated for at least a year and warnings about its usage have been 
common on this list.  Practically, as with most issues like this, any
solution requires doing though.

Also, I will say that I don't recall a single query on this list since
the change that has indicated this is a major problem.  Everyone seems
to be taking it in stride.  Some even preface their remarks with something
like "I should've known better, given all the previous warnings about this
syntax".  You had something similar but with a different point.  I'm sure 
now that I've given my impression of the relative ease with which this 
change has been accepted, we'll hear from allot of people explaining their 
resulting pain! ;-)  In any case, I encourage you to follow-up on your
concerns with some ideas that you would like to propose and put into 
action.  I'm sure the list will provide feedback on them either before
or after you provide them.  Maybe even both! ;-)

Just my $.02.



Larry Hall                              lhall@rfk.com
RFK Partners, Inc.                      http://www.rfk.com
118 Washington Street                   (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office
Holliston, MA 01746                     (508) 893-9889 - FAX


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/