On Mon, 06 Aug 2007 19:32:13 -0400, Tom Lane <tgl@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I'm interested in this because I'm about to stick a symlink to > /usr/share/zoneinfo into one of my packages, and I cannot see a good > reason to spell it as ../../../../usr/share/zoneinfo. The chroot itself is not affected. The problem is a chroot when it's NOT set up, but you run something in it, e.g. /mnt/rhel5/usr/bin/ls. Usually you learn not to use absolute links when manupulating NFS roots. But I think the worst surprise of the sort that I received was when I untarred something with somehting like (cd /mnt/badger/var/spool && tar xf -) and the cd target was an absolute symlink. Hilarity ensued. > I can think of a number of cases where [a relative symlink would] > be a bad idea, and none where it really solves a problem. I'd like to hear how a relative symlink can be a bad idea. It seems obvious to me that all symlinks should be relative, but equally obviously I'm forgetting something. What do you have in mind? -- Pete -- Fedora-maintainers mailing list Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers -- Fedora-maintainers-readonly mailing list Fedora-maintainers-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers-readonly
