On 10/08/2009 08:08 PM, yermandu wrote:
Chris Staub,
I find it very nice the purpose of scratch to understand the workings of
the Linux piece to piece. I think that the goal of the book is to
acquire knowledge then it is important to be specific. The book is very
good.
But to illustrate what im trying to say, i will use the Chapter 10:17,
in the book mentioned above.
It is written there:
*
ln-sfv libncursesw.so / usr / lib / libcursesw.so *
The ln command is used to create the link and in summary we could say
/ ln [options] target link /
Im conditioned myself to put the links and specifying the exact
location. Both the "Where Are the original" as the "Where put the link".
Avoiding potential issue.
Again, *what* "potential issue"? I don't see what you're saying here,
other than *you* like to have link locations point to exact locations so
that *you* don't get confused. But earlier, you said that were having
problems with Ncurses (as "clear" was looking in /tools) and that using
the different link commands somehow solved it. If using exact paths
works *for you* that's fine, but please don't mislead other users by
claiming that is a "fix" for a "problem."
Not that the way is written in the book may be incorrect, no. But, in my
opnion, if the goal is educational, to be specific about the exact
location is the ideal way to teach people.
When we put the exactly location of the l*ibncursesw.so *that are
localised /usr/lib/ we can say, look student, you will create a link
from this local to another local.
That's what I want tell to you. I apreciate your attention.
Regards.
There are reasons why the book has the commands they way they are. Using
more general, relative locations does have advantages. For example, if
you were to move the libs to some other location, then links pointing
explicity to "/usr/lib" would no longer be valid and would have to be
recreated, but if it pointed just to "./ncursesw.so" then the link will
be correct no matter where the libs are placed.
Of course I know many people probably wouldn't move libs elsewhere, but
some do, and the same principle does also apply to any symlinks you'd
put anywhere else. Many package download sites may create a "latest"
symlink pointing to the most recent version. I even use symlinks to help
organize a collection of fanart (from various movies/TV shows/whatever)
I've downloaded. In all those cases, should the original location be
moved/renamed, any symlinks that point to the whole path would also have
to be recreated.
Further, as you cite "educational" value, I believe having links not
point to an exact location is *more* educational since you actually need
to put a little thought into following them.
_______________________________________________
Clfs-support mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cross-lfs.org/listinfo.cgi/clfs-support-cross-lfs.org
