[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       coreutils
Subject:    [coreutils] Re: Help with "ln" command using -b --suffix options
From:       Surfin Ten <surfin10 () gmail ! com>
Date:       2010-07-01 23:53:32
Message-ID: AANLkTimEcQzHJMnpNEf-MbGh-iwMwI6LOEzIepSySXK0 () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

Sorry, in my prior post the subject link should have been "Help with
the ln command using the --backup=existing option"

Sam

On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 5:48 PM, Surfin Ten <surfin10@gmail.com> wrote:
> According to Section 2.2 "Backup options" of the GNU coreutils
> documenation, using --backup=existing will make numbered backups of
> files that already have them, simple backups of the others.
>
> However, issuing the following command results in this (I realize in
> the example it doesn't make sense that a person would want to do this,
> but this is the easiest way to explain what I am trying to do as part
> of a larger project):
>
> First command:
> ln --backup=existing -s myfile.txt link_to_myfile.txt          //
> creates symbolic link called "link_to_myfile.txt"
>
> Second command (identical to the first):
> ln --backup=existing -s myfile.txt link_to_myfle.txt          //
> creates symbolic link called "link_to_myfile.txt~ (note the tilde at
> the end since a link with the same name already exists)
>
> Third command (identical to the first and second):
> ln --backup=existing -s myfile.txt link_to_myfile.txt         //
> overwrites the link created by the second command, does *not* create a
> numbered backup
>
> My question is, shouldn't use of the --backup=existing option result
> in the third command creating a link called "link_to_myfile.txt~1"
> since the documentation says --backup=existing creates numbered
> backups?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Sam
>


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]