On Friday 23 of January 2015 15:45:57 Dimitrios Apostolou wrote:
> Thank you Joerg. If so then it is an issue that must be fixed in
> automake, which is the reason I cross-posted to both projects, because I
> am not sure which one should be changed!
What solution you exactly propose? Note that 'h
Dimitrios Apostolou wrote:
$ touch blah
$ ln -s blah link_to_blah
$ cp --dereference link_to_blah blah2
The result is that "blah" and "blah2" have different inode!
Of course, and that's what one would expect, cp makes copies by default, and the
copies have a different inode from the original.
On Mon, 19 Jan 2015, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Dimitrios Apostolou wrote:
On Fri, 16 Jan 2015, Paul Eggert wrote:
Dimitrios Apostolou wrote:
Why is such behaviour desirable?
It's more logical, since it causes tar to behave as if the symlink were not
there, and the pointed-to file was there
On Sun, 18 Jan 2015, Paul Eggert wrote:
Dimitrios Apostolou wrote:
But when the tarball is extracted, two files with same inode are created,
which
is kind of unexpected behaviour - at least for me
Other utilities have similar behavior (e.g., ls, cp, du), in that they
pretend the symlink isn
