This is the mail archive of the
cygwin
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: enlarge MAXSYMLINKS
- From: Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin at cygwin dot com>
- To: cygwin at cygwin dot com
- Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2009 19:24:53 +0100
- Subject: Re: enlarge MAXSYMLINKS
- References: <588311DB-B528-4386-8C6D-A14A37F85737@free.fr>
- Reply-to: cygwin at cygwin dot com
On Mar 10 19:05, Denis Excoffier wrote:
>
> Again about symbolic links, here is some new inputs:
>
> 1) MAXSYMLINKS is no longer used in modern Cygwin's;
> indeed, cygwin-1.5.25-15 uses MAX_LINK_DEPTH and
> cygwin-1.7.0-42 uses SYMLOOP_MAX; both are set to 10
> (in ./winsup/cygwin/path.h for 1.5 and in
> ./winsup/cygwin/include/limits.h for 1.7)
>
> 2) whether the filesystem is NTFS or not makes no difference;
> whether the symlinks are created using winsymlinks or nowinsymlinks
> makes no difference
>
> 3) the only clean way to make cygwin1.dll accept a chain of 32 symlinks
> (instead of 10) is through recompilation
You know that _POSIX_SYMLOOP_MAX is 8 and using everything beyond that
value is non-portable and just curtesy, right? Setting SYMLOOP_MAX to
10 is setting it to some arbitrary value >= _POSIX_SYMLOOP_MAX which
should be sufficient in all cases.
The MAXSYMLINKS value you're referring to in your original mail has
nothing to do with Cygwin. You found it in newlib/libc/sys/rtems which
is, no surprise I hope, RTEMS specific.
Corinna
--
Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat
--
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/