On Wed, 26 May 2010 21:03:18 -0800, Nick LaForge <nicklafo...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>>> you'll get no argument from me on that score.
>
>> Ok. I'll remove it in the next version.
>
> I think he was responding to my hyperbolic statement there. There's
> no reason not to use symlinks if we can't bind things anyway. Your
> option 2 just links to the root dir in /usr/local which is just fine
> provided the permissions are in place and the /usr/local dir is not
> just a bunch of symlinks to individual files in /tmp/tcloop (actually
> the case in my tinycore install, not that I care). The only problem
> with symlinks here wasith your option 1 where cp was making copies of
> symlinks instead of original files beacuse you used 'cp -HRp' instead
> of 'cp -LRp'.
sorry for getting thing out of order. I simply took the hyperbolic
statement as a request to remove it. I could be OK with that, but would
want to think about the consequences of taking either path. Also, I am not
sure that the L/H solution will solve all of the issues -- there is a
ownership problem, but I am not sure if 9vx has to keep the system level
applications owned by root/admin/sys. Actually I think that would be a
very good idea, but the only way to keep the permissions straight (that I
know of anyway) is to run the cp under sudo. Anyway, I have not completely
thought through the issues yet, but ...
Laters,
EBo --
ps: I have a big stick, and if I ever find the sandman I think I will give
him a resounding thwack up the back of his head...
