Re: chown: Function not implemented
On Sat, Dec 12, 1998 at 09:52:12PM -0800, Stephen Zander wrote:
> >>>>> "cfm" == cfm <email@example.com> writes:
> cfm> I note that there is a bug filed on this now. Our web
> cfm> publishing scripts use chown and rearrange symlinks a lot.
> cfm> Is this somehow `deprecated' and not to be counted on in
> cfm> which case I'd make my own /bin/lchown? chown -h failed same
> cfm> way.
> Why, other than for aesthetic reasons, would you want to change the
> ownership of a symlink? Ownership of the link doesn't influence
> access to the file the link references, nor does it affet the ability
> of non-priviledge users to remove the link.
Some programs act differently according to the name they are called with.
Theoretically a program when called by a certain symlink may do something
you don't want just anybody doing.
Mike Schmitz firstname.lastname@example.org http://www.bend-or.com/~mschmitz
Don't blame me - I voted libertarian! http://www.lp.org/
Use Debian Linux - the free Gnu/Linux http://www.debian.org/
"If encryption is outlawed, only outlaws will have encryption"