Re: [bug-gnulib] The drawbacks of the --symlink option

[Bruno Haible]

Paul Eggert wrote:
> -s isn't for saving disk space.  If that were the issue, we wouldn't
> bother.  -s is for not having two slightly-different copies of the
> same file, which is a real maintenance hassle for people who commonly
> change both gnulib and the application.
> 
> The symlinks aren't perfect, but for someone like me ...

Sure, for you and Jim the symlinks are the more efficient way of working.

The documentation is targeted at everyone else, who is not a coreutils
maintainer. Only people with enough experience with gnulib can work in
the symlinked situation.

> they are more 
> reliable than gnulib-tool --update, since I often wouldn't remember to
> invoke gnulib-tool, and even if I remembered I probably wouldn't
> remember the options I'd have to give it

"gnulib-tool --update" doesn't take any other options. It fetches all it
needs from m4/gnulib-cache.m4 and m4/gnulib-comp.m4.

Bruno