Re: Bug: link.exe

[Sam Steingold <sds at gnu dot org>]

> * Corinna Vinschen <pbevaan-pltjva@pltjva.pbz> [2004-12-23 10:35:16 +0100]:
>
>> My temporary fix for my developers is to remove coreutils `link' from
>> our systems,

that's what I had to do too.

>> but if it is reinstalled every time coreutils is
>> upgraded, this will cause an ongoing problem.

indeed.

moving the woe32 directory forward in PATH appears to be the only
"solution" (you never know what important unix commands will be shadowed)

> The link tool is installed by default on Linux as well.

what does it do that ln(1) does not?
alas, both ln(1) and link(1) are in SUS,
http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/utilities/ln.html
http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/utilities/link.html
so we are stuck here.

> I guess you read my announcement?

the announcement did not mention link(1).
or you mean that you are willing to surrender maintainership?

Thanks.

-- 
Sam Steingold (http://www.podval.org/~sds) running w2k
<http://www.camera.org> <http://www.iris.org.il> <http://www.memri.org/>
<http://www.mideasttruth.com/> <http://www.honestreporting.com>
Those who can't write, write manuals.

--
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/