bug#32127: RFE -- in the way "cp -rl" -- enable 'ln' to do likewise?

[L A Walsh]

Michael Stone wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 02:15:14PM -0700, L A Walsh wrote:
> >   I can't think of a similar failure mode that I'd want a hard link
> > created
>
> Yes, you've made that clear
---
        I think you are making it clear that you didn't
understand what I said and why I said it.

	I said that I could not think of a similar situation 
that would involve creating a hard link by default, as I would
not be less than 50% certain it was what was wanted.

        That is directly the opposite of my initial proposal
to handle directories differently and default to the only
option that works rather than assuming they got it wrong
and issuing an error message and not doing anything useful
for them.

        You seem to think my positions on the two types of links
would be the same when they are not.  In almost any
circumstance where you could create a hardlink, you could also
create a symlink -- I.e. if you *wanted* to try to do what the
user wanted, there is no way to know -- since there are two
possibilities.

        In the case of creating a link to a directory there is
no choice in creating a "working solution".  If you want a link 
there, it HAS to be a symlink.  That the user would bother to
use the 'ln' (link) command in the first place is a sufficiently
convincing "argument" that they really DID want a link there.
That they didn't explicitly specify the type should additionally
be taken that they didn't care enough to specify the type -- only
that the link be created.

        I hope that clarifies that I'm not attempting to always
find some "automatic action", but saw that in this case, it
wouldn't be hard to figure out what was wanted and that doing
so wouldn't be hard to undo if it was not.