Re: [SLE] How do I remove a sym link?
From: Randall R Schulz (rschulz_at_sonic.net)
To: firstname.lastname@example.org Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 10:49:57 -0700
On Tuesday 31 August 2004 10:20, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
> * Randall R Schulz <email@example.com> [08-31-04 00:44]:
> > Did you follow your own advice in order to confirm it's usefulness?
> sure did.
Then you know that "man rm" will in no way answer Tom's question.
> > Actually, this one is not so straightforward to find in the manual.
> > The "rm" man page doesn't mention any of the special details
> > pertinent to the treatment of symbolic links. The relevant
> > information is on the "unlink (3p) man page, where the following
> > statement appears:
> > "If path names a symbolic link, unlink() shall remove the symbolic
> > link named by path and shall not affect any file or directory named
> > by the contents of the symbolic link."
> If you read my entire post, you would know that I told him to treat
> the "sym" link as a file...
Yes. As did I and others.
> > If one doesn't know that the system call that forms the basis of the
> > "rm" command is "unlink" (and why would one?), then the hunt for the
> > information could be a lengthy one.
> And unnecessary, in this case. The question was about soft or sym
> links, not hard links.
It is necessary. Hard links are not an issue at all, but the "unlink(3p)"
man page is not limited to the treatment of hard links. And only on the
unlink(3p) man page is the information presented about how symbolic links
are special. The (3p) section of the manual is for library calls, not
something we generally consider non-programmers to have to be familiar
with to successfully use the system.
> You make me think that you believe that one need not make any effort
> to gain his own solutions. While I did not present him with the
> specific command line command necessary to complete his task, he did
> not provide the file/link name necessary and I did give him sufficient
> refference and direction to complete his task.
Not at all. As you see, I posted another reply that suggested that in this
case a simple experiment would have told him what he needed to know. And
I do generally subscribe to the notion that one learns better by being
more engaged in whatever action is required to access the desired
knowledge. Experimentation is usually a more engaged mode than simple
asking a question and receiving an answer.
> He will learn to do for himself if you lead him. He will learn to
> rely on you if you provide the answers. And I am using 'you' in
> general, not specifically Randal R Schultz.
> I will help anyone who asks for help and shows that he is making an
> effort, ie: wants *assistance*.
And I suggest that when the request does not meet your criteria of a
question deserving an answer from you, you should simply remain silent.
Personally, my policy is never to post only to chastise. If I have a
criticism _and_ and answer, I'll give both. If I have a criticism only, I
(try to) hold my tongue (but do not always succeed).
> Patrick Shanahan
-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to firstname.lastname@example.org Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: email@example.com