On Wed, 7 Mar 2018, Ahmad Samir wrote: > On 6 March 2018 at 14:34, Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > i'm curious about RH packaging policy that dictates that some > > command variants are packaged for fedora to install with symlinks > > and others with hardlinks. > > > > trivial example in /usr/bin on my fedora 27 system: > > > > -rwsr-xr-x. 1 root root 52984 Aug 2 2017 at > > lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root 2 Aug 2 2017 atq -> at > > lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root 2 Aug 2 2017 atrm -> at > > > > so even though all of those "commands" are in the very same directory, > > atq and atrm are supported via symlinks, not hardlinks. > > I am not an expert, some commands act differently when called > differently; so executing /bin/atq would make the 'at' binary behave > differently than when it's executed as plain 'at'. > > The same logic applies to bash, /bin/sh is a symlink to /bin/bash, > but when bash is invoked as sh it acts differently than when invoked > as 'bash'. Have a look at the bash manual page for more info. yes, i'm aware of this, and i'm pretty sure whether a hardlink or symlink is used would make no difference. rday _______________________________________________ users mailing list -- users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
