Re: [PATCH] Add a new lstat implementation based on Win32 API, and make stat use that implementation too.

From: David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org>
Date: Sep 3, 2007, 11:51 UTC
Message-ID: <86odgkhsqd.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0709031238400.28586@racer.site>

Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:

Show 17 quoted lines

> On Mon, 3 Sep 2007, Marius Storm-Olsen wrote:
>
>> Robin Rosenberg said the following on 02.09.2007 22:27:
>> > s?ndag 02 september 2007 skrev Marius Storm-Olsen:
>> > > (Also, since Windows doesn't really handle symlinks, it's fine that 
>> > > stat just uses lstat)
>> > 
>> > It does now: See 
>> > http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa363866.aspx
>> 
>> Yeah, I know about Vista's improved support for symbolic
>> links. However, I think we can let that lay for a while, until we
>> decide to make Git generate proper symlinks on Vista. I don't see
>> it as a 1st priority at the moment, and we can always add the
>> needed functionality in a separate stat() function later.
>
> ... and force everybody to upgrade to Vista,

Nonsense.  Supporting a feature is different from requiring a feature.

> thereby working for Microsoft for free?  You _know_ that I will
> oppose that change.

If Microsoft decides to shoot their users less in the foot than previously, I don't think that we should take over the gun.

However, if the symbolic link semantics hinted at elsewhere indeed are as broken as claimed and/or documented, the actual usefulness of symbolic links seems so limited that we would not be doing their users a favor by supporting relative symlinks. And absolute links frankly have very little place in a _work_ directory (and git does not currently keep track of enough things in order to make it useful as a filesystem snapshot system).

I would like to see actual test results to get a confirmation of whether indeed relative symlinks are as broken under Vista as rumored. If they are, it seems quite pointless supporting any symlinks under Windows at the moment. Until I see actual test results, I would give Microsoft the benefit of doubt.

-- 
David Kastrup