Hi,
Looking at src/scripts/snapinstaller more closely, I saw this block of code:
# install using hard links into temporary directory
# remove original index and then atomically copy new one into place
logMessage installing snapshot ${name}
cp -lr ${name}/ ${data_dir}/index.tmp$$
/bin/rm -rf ${data_dir}/index
mv -f ${data_dir}/index.tmp$$ ${data_dir}/index
Is there a technical reason why this wasn't written as:
logMessage installing snapshot ${name}
cp -lr ${name}/ ${data_dir}/index.tmp$$ && \
/bin/rm -rf ${data_dir}/index && \
mv -f ${data_dir}/index.tmp$$ ${data_dir}/index
This feels a little safer to me - I'd hate to have the main index rm -rf-ed if
the cp -lr command failed for some reason (e.g. disk full), but maybe Bill Au &
Co. have a good reason for not using &&'s. There may be other places in
various scripts that this might be applicable to, but this is the first place I
saw the extra safety possibility.
Thanks,
Otis
