Re: RH rpms, and installing using hardlinks vs symlinks

On 7 March 2018 at 12:34, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > On Wed, 7 Mar 2018, Ahmad Samir wrote: > >> On 6 March 2018 at 14:34, Robert P. J. Day wrote: >> > >> > i'm curious about RH packaging policy that dictates that some >> > command variants are

Re: RH rpms, and installing using hardlinks vs symlinks

On 6 March 2018 at 10:45, Ed Greshko wrote: > On 03/06/18 22:30, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > > so there's probably more admittedly trivial questions coming, but > > only because i'm being forced to look more closely at things than i > > have in a long time. > > > OK.

Re: RH rpms, and installing using hardlinks vs symlinks

On Sun, 11 Mar 2018, Gordon Messmer wrote: > On 03/10/2018 05:24 PM, Stephen Morris wrote: > > I can't find the documentation any more, but I have found > > documentation on how to use copy the create the target as a hard > > link or as a soft link. It is possible I have incorrectly > >

Re: RH rpms, and installing using hardlinks vs symlinks

On 03/10/2018 05:24 PM, Stephen Morris wrote: I can't find the documentation any more, but I have found documentation on how to use copy the create the target as a hard link or as a soft link. It is possible I have incorrectly remembered what I had read, or it is possible over time that the

Re: RH rpms, and installing using hardlinks vs symlinks

On Sun, 2018-03-11 at 19:59 +1100, Stephen Morris wrote: > On 11/3/18 1:09 pm, Ed Greshko wrote: > > On 03/11/18 09:24, Stephen Morris wrote: > > > I can't find the documentation any more, but I have found documentation > > > on how to > > > use copy the create the target as a hard link or as a

Re: RH rpms, and installing using hardlinks vs symlinks

On 11/3/18 1:09 pm, Ed Greshko wrote: On 03/11/18 09:24, Stephen Morris wrote: I can't find the documentation any more, but I have found documentation on how to use copy the create the target as a hard link or as a soft link. It is possible I have incorrectly remembered what I had read, or it

Re: RH rpms, and installing using hardlinks vs symlinks

On 03/11/18 09:24, Stephen Morris wrote: > I can't find the documentation any more, but I have found documentation on > how to > use copy the create the target as a hard link or as a soft link. It is > possible I > have incorrectly remembered what I had read, or it is possible over time that >

Re: RH rpms, and installing using hardlinks vs symlinks

On 11/3/18 4:35 am, Gordon Messmer wrote: On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 2:57 PM, Stephen Morris wrote: No, what I was mentioning here is what I have read as standard linux functionality with copying, when a file is copied, and it doesn't matter where to, rather than create a

Re: RH rpms, and installing using hardlinks vs symlinks

On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 2:57 PM, Stephen Morris wrote: > No, what I was mentioning here is what I have read as standard linux > functionality with copying, when a file is copied, and it doesn't matter > where to, rather than create a 2nd copy of the file, the "copy" is

Re: RH rpms, and installing using hardlinks vs symlinks

Samuel Sieb wrote: > On 03/09/2018 03:06 PM, Todd Zullinger wrote: >> In the git package, there aren't symlinks. Within /usr/bin, >> the git binaries which are identical are hardlinked to each >> other. And separately, within /usr/libexec/git-core, the >> git binaries which are identical are

Re: RH rpms, and installing using hardlinks vs symlinks

On 03/09/2018 03:06 PM, Todd Zullinger wrote: Samuel Sieb wrote: In the git package, there aren't symlinks. Within /usr/bin, the git binaries which are identical are hardlinked to each other. And separately, within /usr/libexec/git-core, the git binaries which are identical are hardlinked to

Re: RH rpms, and installing using hardlinks vs symlinks

On Sat, 2018-03-10 at 09:57 +1100, Stephen Morris wrote: > No, what I was mentioning here is what I have read as standard linux  > functionality with copying, when a file is copied, and it doesn't > matter where to, rather than create a 2nd copy of the file, the > "copy" is created as a hard link

Re: RH rpms, and installing using hardlinks vs symlinks

Samuel Sieb wrote: > On 03/09/2018 01:27 AM, Robert P. J. Day wrote: >>that was my understanding -- as long as the files are within >> precisely the same directory, hard links could still be used, but any >> cross-directory links (even if within the same filesystem) will use >> symlinks. is

Re: RH rpms, and installing using hardlinks vs symlinks

On Sat, 10 Mar 2018, Stephen Morris wrote: > On 9/3/18 9:11 am, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: > > On Fri, 2018-03-09 at 07:59 +1100, Stephen Morris wrote: > >> It is my understanding that currently when a file copied to any > >> location, a physical copy is not produced, the copy is a hardlink > >>

Re: RH rpms, and installing using hardlinks vs symlinks

On 9/3/18 9:11 am, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: On Fri, 2018-03-09 at 07:59 +1100, Stephen Morris wrote: It is my understanding that currently when a file copied to any location, a physical copy is not produced, the copy is a hardlink to the original file, until such time as one of the "copies"

Re: RH rpms, and installing using hardlinks vs symlinks

On 03/09/2018 01:27 AM, Robert P. J. Day wrote: that was my understanding -- as long as the files are within precisely the same directory, hard links could still be used, but any cross-directory links (even if within the same filesystem) will use symlinks. is that about right? From what you

Re: RH rpms, and installing using hardlinks vs symlinks

On Thu, 8 Mar 2018, Samuel Sieb wrote: > On 03/08/2018 12:59 PM, Stephen Morris wrote: > > On 9/3/18 6:13 am, Todd Zullinger wrote: > >> Robert P. J. Day wrote: > >>> ... ah, so the replacement of those cross-directory hardlinks > >>> with symlinks will happen in F28, is that what you're saying?

Re: RH rpms, and installing using hardlinks vs symlinks

On 03/08/2018 12:59 PM, Stephen Morris wrote: On 9/3/18 6:13 am, Todd Zullinger wrote: Robert P. J. Day wrote: ... ah, so the replacement of those cross-directory hardlinks with symlinks will happen in F28, is that what you're saying? The change will be in F28, yes.  The few files in /usr/bin

Re: RH rpms, and installing using hardlinks vs symlinks

On Fri, 2018-03-09 at 07:59 +1100, Stephen Morris wrote: > It is my understanding that currently when a file copied to any > location, a physical copy is not produced, the copy is a hardlink to the > original file, until such time as one of the "copies" is changed and > then both become

Re: RH rpms, and installing using hardlinks vs symlinks

On 9/3/18 6:13 am, Todd Zullinger wrote: Robert P. J. Day wrote: ... ah, so the replacement of those cross-directory hardlinks with symlinks will happen in F28, is that what you're saying? The change will be in F28, yes. The few files in /usr/bin are simply copied, not symlinked. Within

Re: RH rpms, and installing using hardlinks vs symlinks

Robert P. J. Day wrote: > ... ah, so the replacement of those cross-directory hardlinks with > symlinks will happen in F28, is that what you're saying? The change will be in F28, yes. The few files in /usr/bin are simply copied, not symlinked. Within /usr/bin, the identical files are hardlinked

Re: RH rpms, and installing using hardlinks vs symlinks

On Wed, 7 Mar 2018, Ahmad Samir wrote: > On 6 March 2018 at 14:34, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > > > > i'm curious about RH packaging policy that dictates that some > > command variants are packaged for fedora to install with symlinks > > and others with hardlinks. > > > >

Re: RH rpms, and installing using hardlinks vs symlinks

On 6 March 2018 at 14:34, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > > i'm curious about RH packaging policy that dictates that some > command variants are packaged for fedora to install with symlinks > and others with hardlinks. > > trivial example in /usr/bin on my fedora 27 system: >

Re: RH rpms, and installing using hardlinks vs symlinks

On Tue, 6 Mar 2018, Todd Zullinger wrote: ... snip ... > The git package uses hardlinks and includes some duplication of > binaries precisely to avoid cross-directory hardlinks. That allows > /usr/bin and /usr/libexec to be mounted on different file systems. i was about to point out that, in

Re: RH rpms, and installing using hardlinks vs symlinks

Robert P. J. Day wrote: > i'm curious about RH packaging policy that dictates that some > command variants are packaged for fedora to install with symlinks > and others with hardlinks. > > trivial example in /usr/bin on my fedora 27 system: > > -rwsr-xr-x. 1 root root52984 Aug 2

Re: RH rpms, and installing using hardlinks vs symlinks

On Tue, 6 Mar 2018, Robert Nichols wrote: > On 03/06/2018 06:34 AM, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > > > >i'm curious about RH packaging policy that dictates that some > > command variants are packaged for fedora to install with symlinks > > and others with hardlinks. > > > >trivial example in

Re: RH rpms, and installing using hardlinks vs symlinks

On 03/06/2018 06:34 AM, Robert P. J. Day wrote: i'm curious about RH packaging policy that dictates that some command variants are packaged for fedora to install with symlinks and others with hardlinks. trivial example in /usr/bin on my fedora 27 system: -rwsr-xr-x. 1 root root

Re: RH rpms, and installing using hardlinks vs symlinks

On 03/06/18 22:30, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > so there's probably more admittedly trivial questions coming, but > only because i'm being forced to look more closely at things than i > have in a long time. OK.  Then I feel compelled to ask the following in the spirit of full-disclosure. In

Re: RH rpms, and installing using hardlinks vs symlinks

On Tue, 6 Mar 2018, Ed Greshko wrote: > On 03/06/18 20:34, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > > i'm curious about RH packaging policy that dictates that some > > command variants are packaged for fedora to install with symlinks > > and others with hardlinks. > > I may be out of line here.  It is just

Re: RH rpms, and installing using hardlinks vs symlinks

On 03/06/18 20:34, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > i'm curious about RH packaging policy that dictates that some > command variants are packaged for fedora to install with symlinks > and others with hardlinks. I may be out of line here.  It is just that I too am curious. A short while back you asked

RH rpms, and installing using hardlinks vs symlinks

i'm curious about RH packaging policy that dictates that some command variants are packaged for fedora to install with symlinks and others with hardlinks. trivial example in /usr/bin on my fedora 27 system: -rwsr-xr-x. 1 root root52984 Aug 2 2017 at lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root