Re: Symlink indirection

From: Andrew Walrond (andrew@walrond.org)
Date: Fri Dec 13 2002 - 11:48:45 EST


Pete,

Sorry for being dense, but what do you mean by 'bindings' ? Hard links?

Andrew

> Frankly, all cases when I had seen the nested symlink farms of that
> depth would be better served by use of bindings - these are not subject
> to any limits on nesting and avoid a lot of PITA inherent to symlink
> farms. To put it another way, nested symlink farms grow from attempts
> to work around the lack of bindings. It's not that you need to replace
> all symlinks with bindings, of course - the crown of the tree is usually
> OK, it's the trunk that acts as source of pain.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Dec 15 2002 - 22:00:29 EST