ranjit@grad1.cis.upenn.edu (Ranjit Bhatnagar) (09/06/89)
Here's some uses for symbolic links, sorted by obviousness. If you think of a symbolic link as just a way of making a file point at another file, you miss the more exciting possibilities of the Amiga's device space. ln -s file sys:foo ln -s file df0:foo/ick ln -s file pipe:input ln -s :dev/ttyd1 aux2: ln -s libs "arexx:showlist 'l'" ln -s everything "arexx:address command find : -print" ln -s "Monthly Report" "arexx:recalc.maxiplan" ln -s Booby "arexx:address command delete : all" ln -s :dev/texprinter "arexx:texify >prt:" The really interesting ones depend on the "arexx:" device, whose use is obvious. It doesn't exist yet - but I'm sure someone will invent it pretty soon. Once "arexx:" exists, anyone can write a (slow) device handler without touching a compiler. Using "assign" effectively creates an independent handler process: assign outmail: "arexx:sendme.uucp" -- the sendme script waits for input instead of being reinvoked every time. If anyone is inspired to write "arexx:" by this, please send me a note. It would be a character-stream device, like ser: or con:, rather than a file-oriented device like df0: or ram:. - ranjit * Ranjit Bhatnagar * 4211 Pine Street * Philadelphia, PA 19104 * 215-222-5767 * "Trespassers w" ranjit@eniac.seas.upenn.edu mailrus!eecae!netnews!eniac!... "Such a brute that even his shadow breaks things." (Lorca)
cosell@bbn.com (Bernie Cosell) (09/07/89)
In article <14083@netnews.upenn.edu> ranjit@grad1.cis.upenn.edu.UUCP (Ranjit Bhatnagar) writes: }Here's some uses for symbolic links, sorted by obviousness. If }you think of a symbolic link as just a way of making a file point }at another file, you miss the more exciting possibilities of the }Amiga's device space. } } ln -s file sys:foo ... Assuming that you were referring to the Unix symbolic link command, I believe that you got *every* one backwards. The form is: ln [-s] <thing that exists> <newname it is to have> /Bernie\
ranjit@grad1.cis.upenn.edu (Ranjit Bhatnagar) (09/07/89)
In article <45274@bbn.COM> cosell@BBN.COM (Bernie Cosell) writes: }In article <14083@netnews.upenn.edu> I wrote: }} }} ln -s file sys:foo } ... } }Assuming that you were referring to the Unix symbolic link command, I believe }that you got *every* one backwards. The form is: } ln [-s] <thing that exists> <newname it is to have> Absolutely. I realized it a bit too late. But you know what I mean! -ranjit "Trespassers w" ranjit@eniac.seas.upenn.edu mailrus!eecae!netnews!eniac!... "Such a brute that even his shadow breaks things." (Lorca)
shf@well.UUCP (Stuart H. Ferguson) (09/11/89)
+-- cosell@BBN.COM (Bernie Cosell) writes: | In article <> ranjit@grad1.cis.upenn.edu.UUCP (Ranjit Bhatnagar) writes: | } ln -s file sys:foo | ... | Assuming that you were referring to the Unix symbolic link command, I believe | that you got *every* one backwards. The form is: | ln [-s] <thing that exists> <newname it is to have> This is one really DUMB thing that has bothered me more and more recently. Mechanical engineers long ago invented polarized (or idiot-proof) plugs to make it impossible to plug things in backwards. Why can't the computer clerisy come up with idiot-proof arguments lists!? My favorite is "strcpy;" I can *never* remember the order for the arguments. And getting them wrong will fry your code as bad as shorting any op-amp. Pardon my outburst. -- Stuart Ferguson (shf@well.UUCP) Action by HAVOC (ferguson@metaphor.com)