Re: autoconf not hard-link safe

[Paul Eggert]

Robert Collins <address@hidden> writes:

> > > It needn't be the default, but it certainly should be an option,
> > 
> > Yes, it would be reasonable to add it as an option.
> 
> Is this something an autoconf developer would be inclined to
> scratch?

I don't think it'd be high priority, no.  (Have you looked into
copy-on-write overlay filesystems?  They might address the general
problem better.)

> If not, could I get some pointers about the best place in autoconf
> to look?

It's scattered throughout the autoconf code, unfortunately.  For
starters, you might look for "O_CREAT | O_WRONLY | O_TRUNC" in
bin/autom4te.in, but I'm sure that's not the only place.