Post B5tpi9yV3w5gRILVxY by lanodan@queer.hacktivis.me
 (DIR) More posts by lanodan@queer.hacktivis.me
 (DIR) Post #B5tpi9jbxIBHh7Ncki by bkuhn@fedi.copyleft.org
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       Am I the only person who, after 30 years of using `/bin/ln`, *still* gets its arguments backwards?If I type:    $ ln -s x yMy mind is always thinking: “I want a symlink where x ⇒ y”, and as such I incorrectly put the destination *before* the source.I am sure `ln` is this way in #POSIX to match the behavior of `cp` & `mv`.  The latter two are intuitive to me because I read it as “copy/move x to y”.    $ ls -l y    lrwxrwxrwx 1 bkuhn bkuhn 1 May  2 14:39 y -> x“y ⇒ x” …  See!?!?!#Unix
       
 (DIR) Post #B5tpi9yV3w5gRILVxY by lanodan@queer.hacktivis.me
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @bkuhn With -s I'd more compare the behavior to chmod/chown given it's non-mangled and so relative to the symlink location, you write the link target (1) into a symlink file (2).
       
 (DIR) Post #B5tpurRnG690k36WNk by bkuhn@fedi.copyleft.org
       1 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @lanodan wrote:> “With -s I'd more compare the behavior [of /bin/ln -s] to chmod/chown given it's non-mangled and so relative to the symlink location, you write the link target (1) into a symlink file (2).”  That's a good point.  Ultimately, a symlink is not really a file in the way humans think of them. (And literally is *not* “regular” file under #POSIX).
       
 (DIR) Post #B5ttkOKv2MAfNQ9Tmq by spacehobo@teh.entar.net
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @bkuhn The way I fixed it in my head was when I memorised that if you leave out the second argument, it makes the link in the CWD with the name of the first argument.  So obviously the first argument is the target, because the second argument is optional!
       
 (DIR) Post #B5ttkOxCk0nPIA43Si by idlestate@toot.cat
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @spacehobo @bkuhn I wonder if there's a sensitive dependence on whether one learned AT&T vs Intel assembly syntaxI find trouble with systemctl subcommand ordering but not, for example git subcommand ordering
       
 (DIR) Post #B5ttkPHPWsxWIpWBxQ by bkuhn@fedi.copyleft.org
       1 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @idlestate Fascinating!  I don't remember one lick of 6502 Assembly, but perhaps it warped my programming brain in a manner that is completely subconscious.🤔 Cc: @spacehobo @lanodan @shrub900
       
 (DIR) Post #B5ttl1B0d8PvpyocFs by spacehobo@teh.entar.net
       1 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @bkuhn @idlestate @lanodan @shrub900 That one may not count, as the target register was often in the mnemonic itself (i.e. `LDA`, `LDX`, `LDY` to load the operand into the A, X, or Y register).
       
 (DIR) Post #B5twaVP2D2LGG93Rdg by carmenlisandrette@mastodon.social
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @bkuhn Using ln is like plugging in an old USB cable for me. It doesn't work the first time, the second time or the third time.... I always mess up -p and -P when I'm using scp as well. Why is it different between ssh and scp??
       
 (DIR) Post #B5twaVpGdVKFZVKOWm by bkuhn@fedi.copyleft.org
       1 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @carmenlisandrette re: ssh/scp w/ the -p and -P.Oh, geez, yeah! 😠I *quit* using `scp` *entirely* at least 20 years ago.  Since then, I just always use `rsync` (with `-e ssh <args>` when needed) even when `scp` would do just fine for the purpose.  & I do that *precisely* because of `scp`'s -P/-p mess!re: USB cable: I don't mind that when 2x works. However, some ports that I regularly plug/unplug require a bit too much pressure even when properly oriented, then I do need 3+x retries & 😡.
       
 (DIR) Post #B6sP4RG17VVpecFD2e by mjw@mastodon.nl
       1 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @bkuhn just recompile coreutils with https://gnu.wildebeest.org/~mark/ls.patch$ src/ls -l ylrwxrwxrwx. 1 mark mark 1 mei  2 23:57 x <- y