Ag. D. Hatzimanikas wrote these words on 04/11/08 11:39 CST: > Now tell me. > > What would you do in that occasion? > > http://linuxfromscratch.org/pipermail/blfs-support/2008-April/064365.html > > Hard link of soft link?
Symbolic link, without hesitation. First of all, that is what the LFS book says to do. :-) But more importantly, /lib could be on a different partition than /usr, so it *must* be a symbolic link in that case. > What if the Original Poster had the / root partition in a different > file system? Answered earlier. See above. > I don't know, maybe is aware of the hard link behavior, I > just say that without thinking I would do symlink because that is the > standard thing to do, and I bet you would do the same. Agreed, 100%. As Richard mentioned, I haven't had a need for a hard link since I can remember. And, if red was located in /usr/bin (which in my opinion it *should* be as there really should never be a need for a restricted ed while in single-user mode), then we *would* need to use your patch. But because both live in /bin as currently stands in BLFS, I don't see the need to do a patch (sed). -- Randy rmlscsi: [bogomips 1003.22] [GNU ld version 2.16.1] [gcc (GCC) 4.0.3] [GNU C Library stable release version 2.3.6] [Linux 2.6.14.3 i686] 11:45:00 up 54 days, 2:33, 1 user, load average: 0.00, 0.04, 0.10 -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-book FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
