From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Subject: Re: [9fans] mv vs cp In-Reply-To: Message from Lucio De Re of "Mon, 08 Oct 2001 08:54:39 +0200." <20011008085438.Y28720@cackle.proxima.alt.za> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Message-ID: <12557.1002525027@apnic.net> From: George Michaelson Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2001 17:10:27 +1000 Topicbox-Message-UUID: 00febf14-eaca-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 > I suppose the fact that some, like me, will have trouble understanding > the discussion (took me a while just to figure the Directed Acyclical > Graph reference) I suppose religious war is to be expected? > > If I understand the above correctly, my take is that symbolic links > are totally unchecked filesystem GOTOs and deserve a much worse fate > than they get. Specially as they can point to the void and often do. > Riiight, but that was designed in. Its a goal. They wanted that behaviour. > As to the rules (-L) for when they are dereferenced or not, that's a > morrass of confusion. No argument. That could have been done so much better. But the idea of a filename, booked into the filename space which says "I may not resolve all the time, but if I do, I point to " Isn't so inherently evil to me. it seems to me it mimics real-world behaviours rather well. Pointing out M$ has .LNK isn't going to help my cause much is it :-) cheers -George