I wonder if "ln -sfh" is portable?
On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 12:23 PM, Christos Zoulas <chris...@zoulas.com> wrote: > On Jan 23, 3:11am, campbell+netbsd-source-change...@mumble.net (Taylor R > Campbell) wrote: > -- Subject: Re: CVS commit: src/share/mk > > | Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 13:15:44 -0500 > | From: chris...@zoulas.com (Christos Zoulas) > | > | On Jan 22, 7:29am, m...@3am-software.com (Matt Thomas) wrote: > | -- Subject: Re: CVS commit: src/share/mk > | > | | I always wondered why we don't use ln -sf > | | and avoid the race. > | > | That does not work because if the destnation is a directory it will > | try to link in the destination directory... (I tried). This is why > | I suggested that it needs to be done differently. > | > | ln -sfh? > | > | As an aside, it would be nice if there were an easy way to create a > | symlink at a temporary location and rename it over the permanent one. > | `ln -sfh' will unlink instead, and mv(1) is too smart for its own good > | about directories to be able to rename over a symlink reliably... > > > Yes perhaps that will work. > > christos
