Les Mikesell wrote: > Marcelo Magno T. Sales wrote: >> Em Quarta 27 Dezembro 2006 04:25, Cameron Simpson escreveu: >>> | Never mind. VIM must be removing the existing file and creating >>> another >>> | one with the same name, which it has permission to do. It does not >>> | effectively change the existing file, it just replaces it. >>> >>> Yep. Does this annoy you as much as it does me? >> >> Yes, it does :) > > While I'd expect an editor to normally write back to the original > file to maintain symlinks, ownership and modes in the case where > the file is writable, this sounds exactly right and what the > user would do manually himself in case write access is denied > and the user has issued the :w! directive. Without the '!' it > should give a 'file is read-only' error. > > Set the sticky bit on the directory if you don't want people > who don't have write permission on the file to be able to delete > it. Then they will be forced to save under a different name. > Symlinks are maintained as long as the name is the same. Hard links are another story. I have seen a lot of editors and word processors that use the write to a new file, and then rename/delete the original file. It tends to protect your work - the original file is there in case something goes wrong during the same process. That way, the worst you lose is the current edits. But as you have noticed, it does not work out as well when editing shared files. Mikkel -- Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for thou art crunchy and taste good with Ketchup!
