On 5/21/07, Corinna Vinschen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
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?
What about -s?
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
Lev
--
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/
