RetroSearch Browse

Sun Feb 12 16:52:56 CET 2012 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2012-February/116437.html

> Why hard links? Symlinks are much more introspectable. When looking at
> a hard link I have no easy way to know it's the same as whatever other
> file in the same directory.

There actually *is* an easy way, in regular ls: look at the link count.
It comes out of ls -l by default, and if it's >1, there will be an
identical file.

I agree with the question, though: this needs to be justified (but
there may well be a justification).

> I also don't understand this mention:
> 
> “The make install command in the CPython 3.x series will similarly
> install the python3.x, idle3.x, pydoc3.x, and python3.x-config binaries
> (with appropriate x), and python3, idle3, pydoc3, and python3-config as
> hard links. This feature will first appear in CPython 3.3.”
> 
> This feature actually exists in 3.2 (but with a symlink, fortunately):

If you look at the patch, you'll notice that the only change is to
make the links hard links.

Regards,
Martin

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2012-February/116437.html below:

[Python-Dev] PEP 394 request for pronouncement (python2 symlink in *nix systems)