Skip to content

Conversation

@sylvestre
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@oech3
Copy link
Contributor

oech3 commented Jan 11, 2026

ln -f does not take too many time. Just removing -v

@sylvestre
Copy link
Contributor Author

ln -f does not take too many time. Just removing -v

i don't understand this, sorry

@oech3
Copy link
Contributor

oech3 commented Jan 12, 2026

I think this is a risk of incorrect usage of outdated coreutils binary (this script uses hardlinks instead of symlinks for Windows currently)

@Ecordonnier
Copy link
Collaborator

Ecordonnier commented Jan 12, 2026

ln -f does not take too many time. Just removing -v

i don't understand this, sorry

I think oech3 is saying that "ln -sf" does not take too much time / is fast, and therefore there is no need to check whether the link already exists. I think oech3 was assuming that the purpose of this patch was performance optimization / not calling ln -vf unnecessarily, and thus suggested removing -v to speed up the call to ln.

I don't understand the patch actually. ln -vf is already idempotent (on linux at least), so what is the benefit of this patch?

ecordonnier@lj8k2dq3:~/test$ touch bar
ecordonnier@lj8k2dq3:~/test$ ln -vf bar foo
'foo' => 'bar'
ecordonnier@lj8k2dq3:~/test$ ln -vf bar foo
'foo' => 'bar'
ecordonnier@lj8k2dq3:~/test$ ln -vf bar foo
'foo' => 'bar'
ecordonnier@lj8k2dq3:~/test$ ln -vf bar foo
'foo' => 'bar'
ecordonnier@lj8k2dq3:~/test$ ls -l
total 0
-rw-rw-r-- 2 ecordonnier ecordonnier 0 Jan 12 15:04 bar
-rw-rw-r-- 2 ecordonnier ecordonnier 0 Jan 12 15:04 foo

Edit: I guess the reason for the patch is to call build-gnu.sh from several processes in parallel?

@Ecordonnier Ecordonnier merged commit 7851f70 into uutils:main Jan 12, 2026
134 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants