[Mailman-Developers] updating templates..
Chuq Von Rospach
Sun, 11 Jun 2000 20:39:45 -0700
At 11:33 PM -0400 6/11/2000, Jim Hebert wrote:
>When I ran a Smartlist installation in a former life, it did a similar
>thing, only it used hardlinks to accomplish the task.
>Is there any wisdom in doing one over the other? I don't recall why
>smartlist used hardlinks,
Not really. I'm sure there are some flavors of unix without symlinks
in them, but I wouldn't use one. Hard links don't work across
filesystems. If, for instance, a site wanted to move the
list/listname folder into a users home directory for access and/or
quota regulation, symlinks work great, hard links might of might not.
>who probably should just assume that Chuq has already done that
>calculation and decided on symlinks =)
Nah. I just use symlinks unless there's some overriding reason not to.
About the only real advantage of hard links is if someone rm's the
thing the symlink is pointing to, everyone's copy breaks, but if you
use hard links, only that instance goes away. On the other hand, what
happens more often is someone unlinks a copy thinking it's the
master, changes it,a nd simply breaks the link rather than updating
all of the copies.
In this case, I chose symlinks because the files aren't next to each
other, so figuring out what they're linked to is going to be
impossible with hard links. I hate hard links that aren't in the same
directory -- but that's a religious issue, not any hard technical one.
Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:email@example.com)
Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org)
And they sit at the bar and put bread in my jar
and say 'Man, what are you doing here?'"