Subject: Re: chmod on symlink Q
To: Frederick Bruckman <email@example.com>
From: Giles Lean <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 04/26/2001 18:27:05
> I would have thought so, too, but this is what it says in the man page
> for 1.5.1_BETA...
> If the option -h is not given, unless the -H or -L option is set,
> chmod on a symbolic link always succeeds and has no effect.
Perhaps the author of that change could provide the reason? I don't
believe that it is required for standards conformance, and it is
wildly counter-intuitive as well as atypical for "Unix-like" systems.