This is the mail archive of the cygwin 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] |
On May 21 15:46, Dave Korn wrote: > On 21 May 2007 15:30, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > > so we can change cygcheck to handle this unambiguously. > > cygpath.
Right. Unfortunately I just found that -m is sometimes used as a modifier (-dm makes sense) and sometimes standalone (-m instead of -w).
Actually it seems to be better to disallow only combinations which explicitely don't make sense, but to allow any combination which make *some* sort of sense. The rules would be, afaics
- Don't allow -d with -l. - Allow any other mix of -d, -l, -m and -w. - Don't allow -u with any of the above flags.
Did I miss one?
As i hinted in my previous message, the flags handling in cygpath is inconsistent. For example: *) "-t mixed" and "-m" are treated differently wrt the "system" options. *) You can have "-l" and "-s" in effect at the same time (which literally means "convert to a short path and then convert back to a long path" -- maybe this is useful, eg it does filename case normalization, and checks to see if the file exists, but it seems odd) *) Options read from a file with "-o" are processed differently to options on the commandline (for example, in that case the most recent of -s and -l takes precedence, rather than both in effect at once.)
Also, in case you missed it some other bug causes "-l" with a nonexistent file to five a corrupted output
-- 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/
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |