>In the case of /etc/hosts -> ./inet/hosts >I've seen lots of trouble from that, anytime someone >ran an editor on /etc/hosts that deletes and recreates >files rather than (like vi) writing over them. It got >to where the more senior admins had to put a script >out that saved off a copy, fixed the symlink, and >sent nasty email to the admin team. That _after_ >everyone had been told more than once to edit >/etc/inet/hosts, _not_ /etc/hosts. >(the editor in question, in addition to being easier >for some folks than vi, had the advantage of putting >an advisory lock on the file so that no two instances >of the editor could have write access at the same time, >thus being more idiot-proof for people some of whom >obviously needed all the idiot-proofing they could get. >I think there _may_ have been a subsequent patch to >the editor to recognize symlinks itself, so that such >problems wouldn't happen. But the origin of the >editor predated symlinks...)
But the editor did have a fatal bug: it removed and replaced symlinks. If the origin of the editor predated symlinks, one would expect source to be available so that the editor could be fixed. Casper
