On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 05:22:09AM +0200, Bjørn Roald wrote:
On 05/11/2012 01:55 AM, Steven Watanabe wrote:
If symlinks are supported: Sym link the directory if there is a conflict, create a subdirectory and symlink all the members. Else if hardlinks are supported: Hard-link all leaves
Are there a rationale for preferring symbolic linked files over hard links. One point that comes too my mind is that the master/link relationship is more explicit, while a hard link is more like a shared pointer with common ownership. So hard links will not provide any effect on the forward header given that the master be renamed or deleted.
Other than that, I have always thought of hard links as something that must be a bit more performant, but I may be dead wrong on that.
AFS doesn't support hardlinks between files in different directories. Some filesystems probably don't support them at all, too. -- Lars Viklund | zao@acc.umu.se