On Thu, 13 Jun 2002, Doug Kaufman wrote: > On Thu, 13 Jun 2002, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote: > [snip] > > Is it '-fR' that you're refering to? I agree... Would it be possible > > to reimplement the recursive part in terms of sh (removes the need for > > -R), and then use rm to remove each present goal file before it's > > copied anew (removed the need for -f)? It would probably be easier to > > implement in perl (meaning we get a point.pl and remove point.sh), and > > in that case, the arguments could be used properly so tricks like > > `cd ../../perlasm;pwd` aren't needed any more (I prefer to have > > relative paths, so I can move a tree at will, see). > > Actually, now that I look at it again, it might be easier to just > change point.sh to use "ln" rather than "ln -s". This will work fine > on DJGPP, whose implementation of "ln" makes a copy. Will hard links > instead of symbolic links cause a problem on other platforms?
It will cause big problems here. But then I may not be a noraml case. I replicate the source tree with symbolic links to a NFS read only source tree on the 14 different platforms I support. Trying to hard link to what's really a symbolic link on another file system will fail. > __ > Doug Kaufman > Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > ______________________________________________________________________ > OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org > Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- Tim Rice Multitalents (707) 887-1469 [EMAIL PROTECTED] ______________________________________________________________________ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
