On Fri, 20 Jan 2006, Tim & Alethea Larson wrote:

> Dave Huang wrote:
>> You'll probably find that they're hard links to each other. Check the

> You're absolutely correct: they are hard links.  I so seldom see that done 
> that I didn't think of it.  What's the rationale for this?  Just curious.

Symlinks don't behave like regular files at all times, but as far as I can 
tell, hard links do (because they are).  So "why bother with something 
that's bound to cause obscure problems in the future", perhaps.


And if the program is expected to take different actions depending on 
which name has been used to start it (like gzip/gunzip), symlinks won't 
work, I believe.


Or simply because it's the default type of link.  There's no need for 
using a symlink here.


MAgnus