On Sun, Oct 03, 2004 at 07:57:33PM -0700, Jeff Chimene wrote:
>
> --- Paul E Condon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Oct 03, 2004 at 07:33:04PM -0700, Jeff
> > Chimene wrote:
> > >
> > > --- Rajesh Menon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > As far as I know, if you operate on the sy
--- Paul E Condon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 03, 2004 at 07:33:04PM -0700, Jeff
> Chimene wrote:
> >
> > --- Rajesh Menon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > As far as I know, if you operate on the symlink,
> you
> > > are operating on
> > > the files/dir that it points to. Unli
On Sun, Oct 03, 2004 at 07:33:04PM -0700, Jeff Chimene wrote:
>
> --- Rajesh Menon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > As far as I know, if you operate on the symlink, you
> > are operating on
> > the files/dir that it points to. Unlike hard links,
> > which are actual
> > copies of the link point
On Sun, Oct 03, 2004 at 06:52:42PM -0700, Jeff Chimene wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm trying to resolve a tar restore issue. Using the
> newest gnu tar.
>
> While using tar to deploy software, today I wiped
> clean my destination directory. This was somewhat of a
> surprise. The only files left in the dest
--- Rajesh Menon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As far as I know, if you operate on the symlink, you
> are operating on
> the files/dir that it points to. Unlike hard links,
> which are actual
> copies of the link pointed to.
> And if I recall right, tar's behaviour, by default,
> is to over-writ
5 matches
Mail list logo
