On 3/30/13 5:06 AM, Marcel (Felix) Giannelia wrote:
> Yeah, discovered set -o physical just after posting, and am considering
> adopting it... but on the other hand, I'm not so sure the facade
> behaviour has to be all that elaborate. For instance, if I give you the
> paths '/path/to/directory' an
On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 15:30:08 -0600
Bob Proulx wrote:
> Marcel Giannelia wrote:
> > The problem is that some commands are "smart" and "know" how you
> > got to your current working dir -- bash knows that you're in a
> > symlink and that the parent dir of the *symlink* (not the actual
> > directory
Marcel Giannelia wrote:
> The problem is that some commands are "smart" and "know" how you
> got to your current working dir -- bash knows that you're in a symlink
> and that the parent dir of the *symlink* (not the actual directory
> you're in) is 'basedir'.
>
> However, this is not the literal m
I just encountered the following behaviour. Set up a directory
structure like:
mkdir basedir
cd basedir
mkdir -p dir1/dir2
ln -s dir1/dir2 dir2link
cd dir2link
now, you're sitting in dir2link, and you type:
cd ../
and hit the Tab key. The possible completions are shown as 'dir1' and
'dir2link',
