Re: vfat patch for shortcut display as symlinks for 2.4.18

Thunder from the hill
2002-06-09T22:50:13Z

Hi,

On 9 Jun 2002, Nicholas Miell wrote:
> Note that there's nothing stopping you from unpacking the tarball in
> cygwin, with it's own (nicely contained, and not nearly as ugly) symlink
> hack.

That's a hack in the cygwin libc, isn't it? It's the lib which opens
another file instead of the original, isn't it?

> Don't forget NTFS,

NTFS isn't known to be well writable. Remember the oopses! (Sorry, NTFS
people, if I do you any wrong)

> SMBFS,

...requires the windows system to be up...

> ISO-9660,

...needs to be burned onto CD first...

> HPFS (if Windows still supports it...),

Not by default, I think.

> and plain old FAT.

...which looses long names, IIRC. That's not a choice of choice...

> There's also third-party support for NFS,

...which again requires the windows to be up and running...

> HFS,

...which also needs to be burned onto cd or stored somewhere else...

> VxFS and others.

...which needs to be put somewhere, too...

I think VFAT is really the only real flexible transport fs for
linux->windows.

Regards,
Thunder
--
German attitude becoming | Thunder from the hill at ngforever
rightaway popular: |
"Get outa my way, | free inhabitant not directly
for I got a mobile phone!" | belonging anywhere