[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: symlink weirdness
From: |
Tim Smith |
Subject: |
Re: symlink weirdness |
Date: |
Tue, 14 Sep 2004 15:21:39 GMT |
User-agent: |
slrn/0.9.8.0 (Linux) |
On 2004-09-14, Roger Dahl <rdnews@dahlsys.com> wrote:
> If your current directory is A and you want to create a relative symlink
> to a file in directory B in directory C, you need to type the path as it
> would look from C, not from A.
...
> This oddity complicates writing scripts that create symlinks.
This does not complicate writing scripts. It makes writing scripts easier,
because it makes "ln -s" predictable.
> We need more intelligent 'ln' and 'cp -s', that, given paths from A to B
> and from A to C can create links between B and C.
>
> Any thoughts?
What a horrible idea. "ln -s foo bar" is very simple now: it makes a
symlink at bar containing foo. This is what you want in scripts.
The correct way to do what you want is to write a *separate* program to
compute relative paths, e.g.,
findrel B C
which would return a relative path to C starting from B, and then do this
in your script:
ln -s `findrel B C` B/whatever
--
--Tim Smith
- Re: symlink weirdness, (continued)
- Re: symlink weirdness, Sam Holden, 2004/09/13
- Re: symlink weirdness, Roger Dahl, 2004/09/14
- Re: symlink weirdness, Stefan Monnier, 2004/09/14
- Re: symlink weirdness, Roger Dahl, 2004/09/15
- Re: symlink weirdness, Stefan Monnier, 2004/09/15
- Re: symlink weirdness, Roger Dahl, 2004/09/16
- Re: symlink weirdness, Barry Margolin, 2004/09/18
Re: symlink weirdness, Barry Margolin, 2004/09/13
Re: symlink weirdness,
Tim Smith <=