On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 10:06:21PM -0600, Raja R Harinath wrote: > Alan Shutko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Raja R Harinath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> 'ln -sf' is a GNU ln extension. It is safer to use 'ln -f -s', > >> especially if you traffic on other unices. > > > > Huh? It's worked perfectly well on every Unix I've ever used. It > > even works on SCO. Next you'll be telling us that we can't do "ls > > -al" we need to do "ls -a -l". > > I meant the ordering of '-s' and '-f'. > > 'ln -sf' doesn't work on SunOS, IIRC. 'ln -f -s' does. Maybe 'ln > -fs' works everywhere too.
Must be quite old SunOS: [colinw@hades ~]$ uname -a SunOS hades 5.6 Generic_105181-12 sun4u sparc SUNW,Ultra-2 [colinw@hades ~]$ ln -sf foo bar [colinw@hades ~]$ ls -l bar lrwxrwxrwx 1 colinw zeus 3 Nov 15 13:47 bar -> foo At any rate it certainly does not appear to be as simple as a GNU extension; according to FreeBSD's CVS repository, 4.4BSD used getopt() in a way that allows 'ln -sf'. Personally, I write POSIX shell code. Beyond that the variation is too random to be able to write code that is both portable and useful. -- Colin Watson [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
