Post #2806641
2026-05-03 06:12 UTC
@collinfunk@mastodon.social
That bug fails to notice that it is using confusing language in the documentation.
ln TARGET LINK_NAME
the target can reasonably be assumed to be the file that is created. But in the case of ln, it's the target *of* the file that is created.
I think that is where my confusion stems from, and I think this language should be updated.
I can't quite think of a good replacement for TARGET, though.
@bkuhn@fedi.copyleft.org @mjw@mastodon.nl
Replies (1)
-
@bkuhn@fedi.copyleft.org 2026-05-03 16:50
@wouter@pleroma.debian.social I learned cp and mv as 'source' to 'destination', so I think the 'ln' docs really should say: 'ln '. But the whole ambiguity of the word 'target' speaks to why “just think of it like cp or mv" doesn't work for many people — especially for symlink. You point/follow a symlink somewhere… like a target? You cp a file somewhere … like a target? Cc: @mjw@mastodon.nl @collinfunk@mastodon.social @pinche_compinche@tuiter.rocks @monospace@floss.social