Re: [Patch]: mkdir -p and network drives

["Pierre A. Humblet" <pierre at phumblet dot no-ip dot org>]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Christopher Faylor" <cgf-no-personal-reply-please@cygwin.com>
To: <cygwin-patches@cygwin.com>
Sent: Friday, May 06, 2005 10:58 AM
Subject: Re: [Patch]: mkdir -p and network drives


> On Fri, May 06, 2005 at 10:55:29AM -0400, Pierre A. Humblet wrote:
> >----- Original Message ----- 
> >From: "Christopher Faylor" <cgf-no-personal-reply-please@cygwin.com>
> >To: <cygwin-patches@cygwin.com>
> >Sent: Friday, May 06, 2005 10:22 AM
> >Subject: Re: [Patch]: mkdir -p and network drives
> >
> >>Well, that was kinda my point.  If we can't remove the "//" handling
> >>because it breaks bash then adding opendir/readdir stuff seems
> >>premature except for the case of ls //foo which is entirely different
> >>from ls //.
> >
> >Sigh.  We need a bash maintainer.  We need to have // working for mkdir
> >-p to work, from what I understand of the code snippet that was sent to
> >the list.
> 
> I thought that Eric Blake implied that // *had* to be translated to /,
> as per POSIX.  I wonder how many programs out there translate a
> standalone '//' to '/'.

That's not Paul Eggert's position, 
http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2005-05/msg00251.html
I don't expect problems with //, we had it working in cvs for a while
and only bash had issues.
Program translating // to / should already have problems and they 
won't be affected if Cygwin keeps //


Pierre