On 8/19/21 3:50 PM, Antonio Diaz Diaz wrote:
Rodrigo Campos wrote:
{ >>a && ln a b && gzip -k b
}
Exactly, the original file is unaffected, therefore nothing to fix in
this specific patch. Note the same happens without "-k" too.
I think the point of Krzysztof is that the patch is incomplete because,
Oh, thanks for chiming in :)
in addition to keep the original file, it should also allow the
(de)compression of links without forcing the user to type also '-f' for
no apparent reason.
It is not the -k flag that disallows this.
$ touch a && ln a b && ls -go *
-rw-r--r-- 2 0 Aug 19 15:29 a
-rw-r--r-- 2 0 Aug 19 15:29 b
$ gzip -k b
gzip: b has 1 other link -- unchanged
Yeap, but the same happens if you run this instead: gzip b (i.e. without
-k).
It is not the -k flag that gets in the way. This is what happens in
gzip, even without using the flag.
Am I missing something?
