Re: [boost] Boost Modularization: did we get it right?

Subject: Re: [boost] Boost Modularization: did we get it right?
From: Bjørn Roald (bjorn_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-05-10 23:22:09

On 05/11/2012 01:55 AM, Steven Watanabe wrote:
> If symlinks are supported:
>    Sym link the directory
>    if there is a conflict, create
>      a subdirectory and symlink all
>      the members.
> Else if hardlinks are supported:
>    Hard-link all leaves
>
Are there a rationale for preferring symbolic linked files over hard 
links.  One point that comes too my mind is that the master/link 
relationship is more explicit, while a hard link is more like a shared 
pointer with common ownership.  So hard links will not provide any 
effect on the forward header given that the master be renamed or deleted.

Other than that, I have always thought of hard links as something that 
must be a bit more performant, but I may be dead wrong on that.

--
Bjørn