On Thu, 2002-01-24 at 11:54, Rui Miguel Seabra wrote: > On Thu, 2002-01-24 at 08:32, Jesper Skov wrote: > > On Fri, 2002-01-25 at 00:54, Rui Miguel Seabra wrote: > > > Reverted Jesper's ln change: > > > http://lists.ebbs.com.au/pipermail/ice-linux/2001-May/000289.html > > > has several points about symbolic vs hard links. > > > > Yes, but I hardly see how any of the points pro hard links matter. > > Please explain which do. > > Jesper, > I searched for ln and only found: > > ln src dst > > that's hard not symbolic. > > thus I corrected to ln -s src dst (which is soft). > > I think we both agree that symbolic is better for this situation, but > some confusion or another was made :) because the spec only had > 'ln src dst' (notoriously a -s was erased and two spaces were left).
Hm, the place I changed was in a perl script. Maybe you changed the resulting .spec file, which is cool. Yes, the command should definitely have -s, whic is also the change I made. Jesper
