[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: RFC on mysql 4.1 in sarge


On Thu, May 19, 2005 at 08:35:03AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > > 3 does not sound so bad to me; it's arguably user error anyway to replace a
> > > package-provided directory with a symlink in this manner
> > If you consider this an user error, then what is the officially blessed
> > way of relocating a package-prodived directory to a different (already
> > mounted) file system?
> currently, that would be bind mounts.

policy could definitely be more clear on this.  specifically, 6.5.4
is somewhat misleading in that case:

	A directory will never be replaced by a symbolic link to a
	directory or vice versa; instead, the existing state (symlink
	or not) will be left alone and dpkg will follow the symlink if
	there is one.

and i had never really heard that symlinking was to be frowned upon.
i do like your suggestion of bind mounts though, and will probably
do that myself in the future.



Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: