Subject: Re: bug#9896: acknowledged by developer (Re: bug#9896: ln man page ambiguity)

From: Paul Eggert <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2011 15:22:00 -0800

On 11/20/11 15:10, Jim Meyering wrote:
>> +By default, destinations (locations of new links) should not already exist.\n\
> 
> "location" might be construed to mean "directory in which it's created".
> What do you think of this?
> 
>   By default, each destination (name of new link) should not already exist.\n\

Yes, that's fine.

>> +  -n, --no-dereference        treat LINK_NAME as a normal file if\n\
>> +                                it is a symbolic link to a directory\n\
> 
> While I like using terms from Usage, using LINK_NAME here
> might make readers think that it applies only to the 1st form:

That's the intent.  -n applies only to the first form;
it does not apply to destinations in general.  -n is
like -T in that respect.