Re: hard links to files on other filesystems disallowed: why?

despen@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Rahul <nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

Robert Riches <spamtrap42@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
news:slrnho11u4.i5f.spamtrap42@xxxxxxxxxxxx:

If that were done, other than the difference between a symlink
being a path in text form and this new thing being a UUID and
inode number (at least partly in text form), what practical
differences would there be from a symlink?

One big difference. Hardlinks are symmetric. THe data itself doesn't get
deleted till the last surviving hard link exists.

With symlinks OTOH if the primary file is gone the link's broken.

Soft links are not broken when the file is gone.

They are working exactly as designed.

There is no requirement that the target of a soft link exist.
Try this command:

cd /tmp
ln -s linktonowhere nowhere

We have hard links for one purpose and soft links for another.

And Firefox uses this feature for its lock:
~$ ls -l .mozilla/firefox/default.gox/lock
lrwxrwxrwx 1 gap users 17 2010-02-21 16:00
..mozilla/firefox/default.gox/lock -> 172.23.77.8:+2017

where 172.23.77.8:+2017 doesn't exist.

Jerry
.

Relevant Pages