On 2016-10-17 11:13, Alexander Thomas wrote:
> Because I don't know what was the use case for the submitter of that
> hard-linking patch, it is safest to preserve it, but make it optional
> with a new --hard-link switch that is only relevant together with
> --existing-chroot. This is also very easy to implement, it only
Looks ok from my point, maybe the documentation of --existing-chroot
could mention the new option.
Regarding your use case: why don't you use chroot tarballs? IMO, tar xfz
might be faster than cp -a.