Hi,
>>"Adam" == Adam P Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Adam> [You (Manoj Srivastava)]
>> Did we ever reach a consensus about the relative vs absolute links
>> in packages? Was it decided that links between top level
>> directories should be absolute, whereas links within on should be
>> relative?
Adam> I agree that this is reasonable but I'd like to see the opinion
Adam> of someone who manages large NFS crosslinked type systems, since
Adam> mount-points is the main issue with the links.
I used to manage a large university group until a couple of
years ago, with three machine architectires, common /usr, automounts,
cross mounted user directories, mounts from departmental servers, etc
etc.
I think you can never be sure of not breaking _any_ symlinks
on _any_ system; there are too many different styles of operation out
there.
Throw in AFS and DFS, and who know what you have out there?
I think, though, you shall catch the majority of installations
if you were careful of the top level directories. Oh, I can see
people breaking up /var and /usr (heck, I do that on my home
machine); but unless you mount them at a different level below /, you
should be fine.
Where does one draw the line? I think just disallowing
symbolic links *between* top level directories is enough.
manoj
--
"There is no distinctly American criminal class except Congress."
Mark Twain
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/>
Key C7261095 fingerprint = CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
