From owner-freebsd-standards  Thu Sep 19 13:55:16 2002
Delivered-To: freebsd-standards@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 72B1737B401; Thu, 19 Sep 2002 13:55:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailbox.univie.ac.at (mailbox.univie.ac.at [131.130.1.27])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 7FFF643E4A; Thu, 19 Sep 2002 13:55:14 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from l.ertl@univie.ac.at)
Received: from korben (mailboxts3-63.univie.ac.at [131.130.99.63])
	by mailbox.univie.ac.at (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g8JKstQF242672;
	Thu, 19 Sep 2002 22:55:01 +0200
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2002 22:54:35 +0200 (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Westeurop=E4ische_Sommerzeit?=)
From: Lukas Ertl <l.ertl@univie.ac.at>
To: Lukas Ertl <l.ertl@univie.ac.at>
Cc: "Tim J. Robbins" <tjr@FreeBSD.ORG>,
	<freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.ORG>
Subject: Re: standards/41576: POSIX compliance of ln(1)
In-Reply-To: <20020819210645.L310-100000@leelou.in.tern>
Message-ID: <Pine.WNT.4.44.0209192251530.652-100000@korben>
X-X-Sender: le@mailbox.univie.ac.at
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE
Sender: owner-freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <freebsd-standards.FreeBSD.ORG>
List-Archive: <http://docs.freebsd.org/mail/> (Web Archive)
List-Help: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=help> (List Instructions)
List-Subscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=subscribe%20freebsd-standards>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=unsubscribe%20freebsd-standards>
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

On Mon, 19 Aug 2002, Lukas Ertl wrote:

> 1) $ ln -sf bar bla
>
> and
>
> 2) $ ln -sf bar bla/
>
> The first version should replace the symlink, the second one should creat=
e
> a new symlink in the already referenced directory (as it currently happen=
s
> on FreeBSD). ln on AIX does exactly that. Of course, AIX could be
> completely broken (as usual :-), but this is how I read the standard.

Has someone of you thought about this one since then? I have taken a look
at the source code and AFAICS if we implement it like this we would have
to throw out the -h option. I don't know if this would break a lot of
things and if it would be a good idea.

What do you think about it?

regards,
le

--=20
Lukas Ertl                             eMail: l.ertl@univie.ac.at
UNIX-Systemadministrator               Tel.:  (+43 1) 4277-14073
Zentraler Informatikdienst (ZID)       Fax.:  (+43 1) 4277-9140
der Universit=E4t Wien                   http://mailbox.univie.ac.at/~le/


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-standards" in the body of the message