[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110324092226.GB22037@openwall.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 12:22:26 +0300
From: "(GalaxyMaster)" <galaxy@...nwall.com>
To: owl-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: absolute symlinks
Gremlin,
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 11:19:27AM +0300, gremlin@...mlin.ru wrote:
> Link Points to Should point to
>
> /usr/tmp /tmp ../tmp
> /var/tmp /tmp ../tmp
I disagree with at least these two (since it was me who asked Solar to
make /var/tmp to be an absolute symlink). We experienced some issues
with the relative symlinks here when /var is moved to, say, /space/var
with a compatibility symlink /var -> space/var installed instead.
I think that for tmp it's safe to assume that /tmp should always
present.
> /dev/fd /proc/self/fd ../proc/self/fd
> /dev/core /proc/kcore ../proc/kcore
> /etc/rmt /usr/libexec/rmt ../usr/libexec/rmt
Cannot comment on these three, I really don't care whether they are
absolute or relative. However, I think it also quite safe to assume
that /proc is there and use absolute symlinks for /proc . With tmp, I'd
agree that it's better to have it relative.
--
(GM)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
