Bill, thanks for pointing out the bad example.
I've added Bob's examples verbatim.
Thanks, Bob.
___
Bug-coreutils mailing list
Bug-coreutils@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils
Thanks for clarifying that.
What's misleading is when you say
ln -s a b .. # creates links ../a and ../b pointing to ./a and
./b
I thought pointing to ./a would be an a in the current directory.
Wouldn't it be nice:
It seems that I fairly often run into situations where I wish ln had
William J. Bruno wrote:
ln -s a b .. # creates links ../a and ../b pointing to ./a and
./b
I thought pointing to ./a would be an a in the current directory.
Nope. The value is used unchanged.
It seems that I fairly often run into situations where I wish ln had
some additional
The examples in the man page say I can
ln -s a b ..
and get links in ../a and ../b to ./a and ./b
but when I try it I get a link from ../a and ../b to
themselves, which are useless circular links.
I'm using tcsh in linux,
uname -r : 2.4.21-20.EL
Bill
Bill Bruno wrote:
The examples in the man page say I can
ln -s a b ..
and get links in ../a and ../b to ./a and ./b
Yes. Perhaps not the most useful of examples. Suggestions for
documentation improvements are always welcome.
but when I try it I get a link from ../a and ../b to
themselves,
