Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
Closed 2 years ago.
Improve this question
man cp says:
-d same as --no-dereference --preserve=links
-P, --no-dereference never follow symbolic links in SOURCE
I test these two options and find they are same in the practice. Both just keep the symbolic links regardless of whether the symbolic(soft) link is valid or not.
Any ideas?
Thank you.
They have the same effect on symbolic links. But -d has the additional effect of preserving hard links. That is, with -d or --preserve=links, if an invocation of cp encounters multiple links to the same file, it will create multiple links to the same file in the destination. Ordinarily cp doesn't pay attention to hard links and creates files that happen to have identical contents if two source files are hard links.
$ touch foo
$ ln foo bar
$ mkdir d; cp -d foo bar d
$ mkdir P; cp -P foo bar P
$ ls -log d P
P:
total 0
-rw-rw-r-- 1 0 Apr 11 17:09 bar
-rw-rw-r-- 1 0 Apr 11 17:09 foo
d:
total 0
-rw-rw-r-- 2 0 Apr 11 17:09 bar
-rw-rw-r-- 2 0 Apr 11 17:09 foo
Related
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
Closed 1 year ago.
Improve this question
It seems that both /bin/ls and /usr/bin/ls have the same inode (and the same sha-256 hash) but the number of hard links displayed by ls -li /usr/bin/ls /bin/ls is 1 instead of 2 :
user#debian:~/Documents/Unix$ ls -lai /usr/bin/ls /bin/ls
8258848 -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 147176 24 sept. 2020 /bin/ls
8258848 -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 147176 24 sept. 2020 /usr/bin/ls
Could somebody explain me what I have misunderstood?
I was puzzled for a while by this too, until I discovered this:
$ ls -ld /bin
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 7 May 31 02:39 /bin -> usr/bin
So /bin is just a symlink to /usr/bin, and there is really only one link to the file.
There are no differences between ls utility. You should know the difference is only between /bin and /usr/bin directories. /bin directory contains all programs that are used by system admin and all others users. /bin directory we can access whenever we want, but /usr/bin is accessible only for users that are locally logged.
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
Closed 2 years ago.
Improve this question
Ubuntu 20 LTS, Installed laradock,
in Ubuntu
$ pwd
/root/Docker
$ ls
blog laradock
$ rsync -a /media/sf_code/blog . && chmod -R 755 blog
$ cd laracock
$ docker-compose exec --user=root workspace bash
in docker
> ll
total 20
drwxr-xr-x 4 laradock laradock 4096 Nov 12 06:52 ./
drwxr-xr-x 1 root root 4096 Nov 12 02:30 ../
drwxr-xr-x 12 root 998 4096 Nov 12 03:09 blog/
drwxr-xr-x 74 laradock laradock 4096 Nov 12 06:35 laradock/
what does 998 mean?
The 4th column is the group id. It there is an entry in /etc/group with this id, then the group name will be printed otherwise the id.
The your example the group id of folder blog is 998 but no group exist inside the container with this id. Mapping a folder to a docker container does not change owner or group.
Some explanation can be found here
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
Closed 6 years ago.
Improve this question
$ mkdir testln && cd testln
$ echo 123 > source
$ mkdir -p aa/bb/cc/dd
$ ln -s source aa/bb/cc/dd/dest
$ ll aa/bb/cc/dd/
total 8
lrwxr-xr-x 1 sato sato 6 1 12 15:08 dest -> source
$ cat aa/bb/cc/dd/dest
cat: aa/bb/cc/dd/dest: No such file or directory
$ cd aa/bb/cc/dd/
$ ll
total 8
lrwxr-xr-x 1 sato sato 6 1 12 15:08 dest -> source
$ ln -s ../../../../source dest2
$ ll
total 16
lrwxr-xr-x 1 sato sato 6 1 12 15:08 dest -> source
lrwxr-xr-x 1 sato sato 18 1 12 15:10 dest2 -> ../../../../source
As you can see, I did two ln
the first one only show dest -> source instead of dest -> ../../../../source, and show No such file or directory, why is that?
It should be:
ln -s ../../../../source aa/bb/cc/dd/dest
The source path must be relative to dest. Check man ln
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
Closed 6 years ago.
Improve this question
I have created a soft link as follows:
/bip/etl>ln -s /bip/etl bipet
And now can see the soft link being created as well..
/bip/etl>ls -lrt |tail
-rw-rw-rw- 1 cdtbipx cduserg 24988174 Jun 19 19:17 227015716_WLR3PSTN_Filtered_06202016_5of6.csv.gz.gpg
-rw-rw-rw- 1 cdtbipx cduserg 23857587 Jun 19 19:17 227015716_WLR3PSTN_Filtered_06202016_6of6.csv.gz.gpg
drwxrwxrwx 1082 prod release 61440 Jul 3 02:51 WSC
drwxrwxrwx 5 oracle oinstall 4096 Jul 4 01:22 dsl
lrwxrwxrwx 1 cdtbipx cduserg 8 Jul 4 08:43 bipet -> /bip/etl
However, I cannot refer to the soft link bipet while I try to search a specific file in the concerned folder.
ls -lrt /bipetl/227015716_WLR3PSTN_Filtered_06202016_6of6.csv.gz.gpg
ls: /bipetl/227015716_WLR3PSTN_Filtered_06202016_6of6.csv.gz.gpg: No such file or directory
What am I doing wrong here?
You created a link bipet in directory /bip/etl (current working directory when you did ln).
You you should do:
ls -lrt /bip/etl/bipetl/227015716_WLR3PSTN_Filtered_06202016_6of6.csv.gz.gpg
Or create the link using (assuming you have privileges to write to the /):
ln -s /bip/etl /bipet
And then you can do:
ls -lrt /bipetl/227015716_WLR3PSTN_Filtered_06202016_6of6.csv.gz.gpg
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
When I copy with a command such as:
cp -R /myfolder /home/backup/
Will the permissions such as 775 (drwxr-xr-x) persist?
Will the owner 'danny:danny' persist, or will the owner change to the person who actually made the copy?
you can run cp -a to preserve the ownership. Note that to preserve root permissions, you must run with sudo.
Without this flag, ownership is not preserved.
If a user copy a file he will become the owner of it.
$ mkdir d1 && touch d1/f1
$ sudo cp -R d1 d2
$ ls -l
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Oct 28 17:58 d2
$ ls -l d2/
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 Oct 28 17:58 f1
It is cp -p to preserve the timestamps,ownership and permissions check out http://unixhelp.ed.ac.uk/CGI/man-cgi?cp
Thanks & Regards,
Alok Thaker