On Thu, 13 Sep 2001, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
> Well, if you don't like them, that's a point against them, but they're
> ideal for this kind of thing, where an atomic update is highly
> desirable.
But symbolic links can do the atomic update, so I don't see that as an
overriding reason. I just feel that more people will be confused by hard
links as a concept, compared with versioned names and a moveable "this
one is current" pointer.
I could always be wrong, of course! (And _real_ newbies don't even know
about soft links. For myself, I always alias "ls" to "ls -F" so I know
what kinds of thing I'm looking at. Perhaps this is what has moulded my
views.)
Let's see if anybody comes in on this thread...
> Alternatively, just make shutting Exim down an upgrade requirement. :-)
It is quite hard to "shut Exim down" completely. About the only way that
works is
kill `cat /var/spool/exim/daemon-pid`
rm /usr/sbin/sendmail
which is not anything I'd recommend.
--
Philip Hazel University of Cambridge Computing Service,
ph10@??? Cambridge, England. Phone: +44 1223 334714.
