On Thu, 28 Nov 2013 18:06:14 +0100 Markus Teich <markus.te...@stusta.mhn.de> wrote: > > Hardlinks seem to be more sane since they maintain a stable state > (no links can be broken), while a symlink can suddenly point to > /tim/buck/too or nowhere at all. > > --Markus >
On the other hand, I find symbolic links to be more transparent to the user (because they are easily identifiable) and more flexible, when it comes to music libraries which have to work across multiple file systems. I get your point though: Inode-references through hardlinks can greatly simplify problems which occur in case the user decides to rename a file, breaking the symlinks depending on it. However, I don't see a definite reason to favor one solution over the other. It may just be another question of what your needs are, so I'd propose to offer a compile-time solution to select symbolic or hard links. Cheers FRIGN -- FRIGN <d...@frign.de>
