Pete Zaitcev <zaitcev@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Mon, 06 Aug 2007 19:32:13 -0400, Tom Lane <tgl@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> 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? Well, aside from the PITA factor of setting it up (how do you determine the number of ".."s to use), there are a couple of things that make me not want to do it that way: 1. Can't move the referencing package's contents around, at least not up or down any directory levels. 2. The symlink will be actively wrong while doing the RPM build/install, because it won't account for the BuildRoot: directories. I don't currently try to do any active testing on the post-%install fileset, but if I did it would not work with a relative symlink. The counterexamples you mention are interesting but don't seem particularly relevant to a read-only reference to a standard system directory. I entirely agree that relative symlinks are appropriate for cross-references between parts of a single software package. I'm not convinced about references to system components that are unrelated to the package doing the referencing. regards, tom lane -- 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
