Hard/Symbolic Links [was: Re: r7347]

Randy McMurchy randy at linuxfromscratch.org
Thu Apr 10 14:45:40 PDT 2008


Ag. D. Hatzimanikas wrote these words on 04/09/08 10:28 CST:
> On Tue, Apr 08, at 02:32 Randy McMurchy wrote:
>> ag at linuxfromscratch.org wrote these words on 04/05/08 02:19 CST:
>>> Replaced with symlinks the hard links to red and its man page
>> Why was this done?
>>
>> I'm not really in favor of changing author's code unless there is
>> really a reason to do it (makes something better, or fixes a problem).
> 
> I am not either, but this seems a case for an unnecessary hard link
> (unless I am missing something obvious, so feel free to be pedantic).

For the sake of the discussion and perhaps some knowledge gained,
I'm continuing on.

I'm curious to know what you mean by "unnecessary hard link"?

In your mind, when would a hard link ever be necessary?

In your mind, what is the difference between a hard link and
a symbolic link?

-- 
Randy

rmlscsi: [bogomips 1003.22] [GNU ld version 2.16.1] [gcc (GCC) 4.0.3]
[GNU C Library stable release version 2.3.6] [Linux 2.6.14.3 i686]
16:40:00 up 53 days, 7:28, 1 user, load average: 0.06, 0.03, 0.01



More information about the blfs-book mailing list