Too many levels of symbolic links

ssgross · 2012-05-31 14:19:32

Hi, I have recently switched from using arch to archbang. for some reason, i can't get any sym links to work. for example, installed Maple15, and created sym links for the executables in /usr/local/bin

sudo ln -s {x,}maple /usr/local/bin

The links don't work. if i do

bash maple

i get the error "Too many levels of symbolic links"

even more wierd, i created a script in my home directory, and made it executable:

#!/bin/bash
echo test

If i do

ln -s testscript testscript.lnk

the link works fine.
if i do

sudo ln -s testscript /usr/local/bin/testscript

the same weirdness continues - i.e. i get the same error as before.
I have tested this on a second computer of mine, running a fresh install of archbang, and it seems to be there from the beginning.

EDIT: don't I feel stupid. It seems ln -s <source_file> </path/to/link/> doesn't make a usable link. it has to be ln -s <source_file> <path to link>/name
to work. Has this always been the case? I've been using linux for 5+ years and never noticed this. in fact, in my wiki to myself about installing maple15, i used the same commands as i posted above, and it has always worked until i switched to archbang.

Last edited by ssgross (2012-05-31 14:39:34)

oliver · 2012-05-31 17:33:45

ssgross wrote:

Has this always been the case?

Back when I started in unix on solaris 2.4 it was always:

ln -s /target/file link

but GNU ln added so many variations that I really have to think now. Behaviour can change based on the whether one of the arguments is a directory or not.... I think there's about 4 or 5 different usages now

scjet · 2012-06-05 08:05:22

Yes, I remeber learning Unix starting with Solaris 2.5.1 and up, we always installed the gcc libs and some gnu-tools, because they had a few different utility commands, that Solaris didn't include.
But now I sometimes long for that simpler/standard "usr" stuff directory structure and commands,....that SunOS had.
Yep, those were the days when a Solaris OS very rarely broke on Sun hardware.

Last edited by scjet (2012-06-05 08:07:40)

oliver · 2012-06-05 08:42:50

scjet wrote:

Yep, those were the days when a Solaris OS very rarely broke on Sun hardware.

If Sun had had a little foresight, we might all be using Solaris x86 instead of linux now... Their x86 version of solaris was great but had two major flaws:
1) it cost 100 UK pounds (back when I was looking into it)
2) it only worked on really esoteric hardware

It was way too late when they tried to correct these issues

scjet · 2012-06-05 18:54:13

oliver wrote:

scjet wrote:
Yep, those were the days when a Solaris OS very rarely broke on Sun hardware.
If Sun had had a little foresight, we might all be using Solaris x86 instead of linux now... Their x86 version of solaris was great but had two major flaws:
1) it cost 100 UK pounds (back when I was looking into it)
2) it only worked on really esoteric hardware
It was way too late when they tried to correct these issues

I completely agree.
...it was too little, too late.... but now Bill Gates "rules", And, in retrospect, I would much rather prefer the lesser of those evils -meaning SUN Microsystems, over this Micro$oft insanity, ...

Last edited by scjet (2012-06-05 19:04:07)

Arch Linux

Announcement

#1 2012-05-31 14:19:32

Too many levels of symbolic links

#2 2012-05-31 17:33:45

Re: Too many levels of symbolic links

#3 2012-06-05 08:05:22

Re: Too many levels of symbolic links

#4 2012-06-05 08:42:50

Re: Too many levels of symbolic links

#5 2012-06-05 18:54:13

Re: Too many levels of symbolic links

Board footer