[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Bug or feature? replace symlink to directory with ln -fs does not wo
From: |
Bob Proulx |
Subject: |
Re: Bug or feature? replace symlink to directory with ln -fs does not work |
Date: |
Mon, 23 May 2005 20:43:17 -0600 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.9i |
Peter Kratzer <address@hidden> writes:
> Contrary to the Unix behaviour (e.g. HP-UX) using this command on a
> GNU/Linux system does not replace the link, but creates a new link in the
> originally referenced directory.
This has appeared as a portability problem a number of times in the
past. If there is any possibility of having a symlink to a directory
then the only portable solution is to remove symlinks before creating
them. This is the only solution for HP-UX. It works compatibly on
GNU systems.
rm -f target
ln -s source target
Paul Eggert wrote:
> Actually, HP-UX is the odd man out here. GNU "ln" is compatible
> with Solaris (at least Solaris 10, which I just checked).
My understanding is that BSD uses ln -sfn or ln -sfh but then notes in
theirs docs that -n and -h are non-portable and "provided solely for
compatibilty with other ln implementations." I have no idea what
other implementations they are referring.
SysV however has never had that option. HP-UX is SysV-like so HP-UX
does not have the option. I don't know anything about Solaris here.
I just checked AIX and the AIX ln only supports -s and -f too.
> And POSIX requires the GNU and Solaris behavior.
Can you cite the reference? I could not find it here:
http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/utilities/ln.html
Only -s and -f are required. Has that publication been superseded?
> Perhaps you can file a bug report with HP.
I do not believe it is a standard option and therefore HP-UX is not
required to support it.
> Recent versions of GNU "ln" support an option -T that should do what
> you want, e.g., "ln -fsT dir.1 dirlink". Older versions have an -n
> option that should also work. These options are all POSIX extensions,
> though, so they might not be portable to HP-UX.
Can you provide a reference to the standards on -T? In any case, it
seems to be a new option and so would not seem portable in any
practical sense.
Bob