Paul Eggert <[email protected]> wrote: > On 11/05/2012 01:55 AM, Joerg Schilling wrote: > > the indication for a hard link is a link count > 1. > > No, it's typical to say that the link count counts > the number of hard links. For example, the Wikipedia > entry for "Hard link" says that a hard link is > "a directory entry that associates a name with a file on a file system", > and this is consistent with the typical interpretation.
I was talking about the relation to a tar archive, not about the correct interpretation inside a file system. So let me be more precise: The indication for the existence of an additional hard link to a file is a link count > 1. This is why it seems to be more consistent not to archive things unter the TAR file type "hard link" in case the link count of the object is 1 only. BTW: what do you do if the file type in question is a symlink? Jörg -- EMail:[email protected] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [email protected] (uni) [email protected] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
