Michael Stone wrote:
On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 02:15:14PM -0700, L A Walsh wrote:
I can't think of a similar failure mode that I'd want a hard link
created
Yes, you've made that clear
---
I think you are making it clear that you didn't
understand what I said and why I said it.
I
On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 4:24 AM L A Walsh wrote:
> In the case of creating a link to a directory there is
> no choice in creating a "working solution". If you want a link
> there, it HAS to be a symlink. That the user would bother to
> use the 'ln' (link) command in the first place is a suffici
On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 03:23:59AM -0700, L A Walsh wrote:
In the case of creating a link to a directory there is
no choice in creating a "working solution". If you want a link there,
it HAS to be a symlink. That the user would bother to
use the 'ln' (link) command in the first place
This is for tail v8.28 encountered on Ubuntu 18.04.
I was doing some experimentation with nano v2.9.3 and tail,
watching the output of tail after saving in nano and encountered some
strange behavior.
I had two terminals open side by side; one with nano and one with tail.
I opened a file called te
Hi,
On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 04:36:44AM -0600, Mike Hodson wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 4:24 AM L A Walsh wrote:
>
> > In the case of creating a link to a directory there is
> > no choice in creating a "working solution". If you want a link
> > there, it HAS to be a symlink. That the user w
Mike Hodson wrote:
I wager that some people *aren't* aware that you cannot hardlink a directory
If they don't know why, they probably don't know the difference
between hard and soft links to files -- and will *then* be annoyed that
linking doesn't work. *THEN*, they will your "
Michael Stone wrote:
Or, they expect the traditional behavior, which is that requesting a
link which can't be created will result in failure. You seem to
completely disregard the possibility that any script written in 40 years
might use that behavior in its logic, while I find it extremely
