Re: Hardlinks to symlinks
>>> Is there any particular reason this was done? >> No sure about the change, but linkat(2) let you choose the behavior >> using the AT_SYMLINK_FOLLOW flag. > It may be unintended fallout from replacing our old ln(1) with the > FreeBSD version. Not _just_ that, because I was really talking about link(2), not ln(1). I've since verified that changing 1 to 0 in the do_sys_link() call made by sys_link() produces the old behaviour from ln without touching userland, so it wasn't a kernel change required by a userland change. /~\ The ASCII Mouse \ / Ribbon Campaign X Against HTMLmo...@rodents-montreal.org / \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B
Re: Hardlinks to symlinks
On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 06:41:53AM +, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote: > On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 11:48:42AM -0400, Mouse wrote: > > Is there any particular reason this was done? > > No sure about the change, but linkat(2) let you choose the behavior using > the AT_SYMLINK_FOLLOW flag. It may be unintended fallout from replacing our old ln(1) with the FreeBSD version. Martin
Re: Hardlinks to symlinks
On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 11:48:42AM -0400, Mouse wrote: > Is there any particular reason this was done? No sure about the change, but linkat(2) let you choose the behavior using the AT_SYMLINK_FOLLOW flag. -- Emmanuel Dreyfus m...@netbsd.org
