[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: convince NTemacs it _can_ symlink
From: |
Ehud Karni |
Subject: |
Re: convince NTemacs it _can_ symlink |
Date: |
Wed, 21 Mar 2001 00:20:30 +0200 |
On Tue, 20 Mar 2001 14:19:54 +0200, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@is.elta.co.il> wrote:
>
> On 20 Mar 2001, Kai Grosjohann wrote:
>
> > Some Lips package might use (fboundp 'make-symbolic-link), then find
> > it's defined, then think it can do symlinks on the local host.
>
> This isn't even the worst possibility. The ones I find harder to find
> and solve are when the fact that make-symbolic-link is fboundp is
> taken as an indication that some other symlink-related feature is
> available. For example, that an `ln' command is available and can be
> invoked.
>
> (I'm not saying that Emacs actually has such code; I simply don't know.
> But I've seen this too many times to assume it cannot happen.)
I'm using NTemacs on a Cygwin enhanced W95 with the following functions
`make-symbolic-link', `file-symlink-p' and `file-executable-p' defined
(in elisp) for quiet some time. I did not notice any ill effects.
May be I use only a limited repertoire of Emacs lisp packages, but I
think that if there are problems with this defun, they are not major.
Ehud.
--
@@@@@@ @@@ @@@@@@ @ @ Ehud Karni Simon & Wiesel Insurance agency
@ @ @ @@ @ Tel: +972-3-6212-757 Fax: +972-3-6292-544
@ @ @ @ @ @@ (USA) Fax and voice mail: 1-815-5509341
@ @ @ @ @ @ Better Safe Than Sorry
http://www.simonwiesel.co.il mailto:ehud@unix.simonwiesel.co.il
remote vs local symlinking, Tom_Roche, 2001/03/20