[Top][All Lists]

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

[Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #57587] Should symlinks follow physical struct

From: Lars Kindermann
Subject: [Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #57587] Should symlinks follow physical structure or logical structure?
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2020 05:46:07 -0500 (EST)
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Ubuntu; Linux x86_64; rv:72.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/72.0

Follow-up Comment #7, bug #57587 (project octave):

I just investigated how several shells and interpreters handle symlinks by
executing the respective equivalent to

cd symlink
cd ..

bash, dash, zsh, fish: logical (can be switched to physical)

tcsh: physical (can be switched to logical)

csh: $cwd logical, 'cd ..' physical

busybox : physical

thunar, nautilus: logical

tcl: pwd logical but 'cd ..' physical

perl, python, R, php, octave: physical

libreoffice (dialogs, fields and scripts): logical

So almost all shells implement both logical and physical maneuvering, most
default to logical behaviour but script languages typically provide no logical

A nice example of a typical discussion presenting all possible strong opinions
about this topic is here:

Personally, I would love Octave to behave "logical", because getting physical
on demand would still be easy. And staying in the logical namespace is
currently impossible.


Reply to this item at:


  Message sent via Savannah

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]