Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Fri, 13 Dec 2002 16:48:45 +0000 | | From | Andrew Walrond <> | | Subject | Re: Symlink indirection |
| |
Pete,
Sorry for being dense, but what do you mean by 'bindings' ? Hard links?
Andrew
> Frankly, all cases when I had seen the nested symlink farms of that > depth would be better served by use of bindings - these are not subject > to any limits on nesting and avoid a lot of PITA inherent to symlink > farms. To put it another way, nested symlink farms grow from attempts > to work around the lack of bindings. It's not that you need to replace > all symlinks with bindings, of course - the crown of the tree is usually > OK, it's the trunk that acts as source of pain.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |