Re: Fwd: Bug#90121: Symlinks in share/glade/gnome shouldn't be relative
On Sun, Mar 18, 2001 at 02:19:46PM -0500, Joe Drew wrote:
> It's quite obvious now, wrt this bug and bug#84067, that policy is not
> right on symlinks; absolute symlinks should be allowed, because otherwise
> people with different filesystem hierarchies will have things break,
> and other boundary cases (like this one) don't work either.
But should we support every obscure partitioning scheme imaginable?
I think it is quite reasonable for us to expect all of /usr/share
to be on the same partition/mount.
Why is glademm copying the files? If it's not going to edit them,
can't it refer to them in the original location? If it is going
to edit them, it needs to copy the files themselves, not the links.
Hamish
--
Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <hamish@debian.org> <hamish@cloud.net.au>
Reply to: