gzip theologians, Just for information, up to now, pigz would merrily unlink the hard link of the input file, even if it has other hard links. While I’m not sure I understand why it shouldn’t do that (that is in fact what you asked it to do), in the spirit of behaving mostly like gzip, it will now* not unlink the input file if it has other hard links. It will let you know it didn’t do that, unless -k was provided. However it will proceed with the compression (or decompression) and create the file with the .gz added (or the .gz removed). If -f is specified, it will unlink the input file regardless of the number of hard links it has.
Mark * “now” means on the develop branch of pigz on github. I have not yet released a new version with that commit. On Aug 21, 2021, at 6:02 PM, Krzysztof Żelechowski <giecr...@stegny.2a.pl<mailto:giecr...@stegny.2a.pl>> wrote: Dnia sobota, 21 sierpnia 2021 15:55:45 CEST Jim Meyering pisze: I.e., we have to weigh "what could go wrong?" against "what would be improved?" In this case, the weights are small on each side. That alone argues against making a semantics-changing modification to such a tool. The bad weight on the "for" side is 0, the counterexamples are unconvincing. BR, Chris
