Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2012 20:58:17 +0000 From: Chris Rees <crees@freebsd.org> To: deeptech71@gmail.com Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: "rm -rf /" fanclub Message-ID: <CADLo8390vK2KPQfwnGQya1ASLtAfTygXXx%2BXMK2ZQ0405BHX2w@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4F5675D9.5050509@gmail.com> References: <4F5675D9.5050509@gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 6 March 2012 20:38, <deeptech71@gmail.com> wrote: > Peter Maloney wrote: >> On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 11:41 PM, deeptech71 at gmail.com >> <deeptech71 at gmail.com> wrote: >> > X11R6 should be a symlink to local or ./local. >> >> Did you test this, by removing the link and creating it >> relative to see if there are any stupid side effects? > > No apparent side effects. And I can't even see why there would be any. In > both cases (X11R6 points to "/usr/local" vs X11R6 points to "local") > - "/usr/X11R6" resolves to the symlink, although > =A0 =A0different symlink texts can be extracted; > - "/usr/X11R6/" resolves to the "local" directory in "/usr"; > - "/usr/X11R6/file123" resolves to "/usr/local/file123". > > TODO: Test whether purely removing X11R6 has any side effects. Not hugely helpful, but I've discovered a few subtle bugs that miraculously disappear when X11R6 symlink was removed. I still miss it though, in a weird way... Chris
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CADLo8390vK2KPQfwnGQya1ASLtAfTygXXx%2BXMK2ZQ0405BHX2w>