Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Should `content/symlink_to_dir` be followed ? #299

Closed
jokester opened this issue Apr 2, 2013 · 4 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
2 participants
@jokester
Copy link

commented Apr 2, 2013

I am using nanoc3.6.2 with ruby2.0 under linux.

Symbolic link to directory under content/ are not counted, due to ruby's Dir[] here.

Should it be followed as symlink_to_file is? It would be convenience if I can ln -s '../vendor/xxx' content/xxx

Not completely tested, but

- Dir[dir_name + '/**/*']
+ Dir[dir_name + '{,**/*}/**/*']

seems to work, by following symlink of dir at most once.

@ddfreyne

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Apr 2, 2013

nanoc doesn’t follow symlinks but it definitely should.

The fix you give may work for a single indirection, but I’d ideally like multiple indirections (with a fixed limit so it doesn’t recurse indefinitely). It’s on the to-do list for nanoc 3.6.x!

@jokester

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Author

commented Apr 2, 2013

@ddfreyne

Glad to know it's going to be improved. Will just use the patch locally before that.

@jokester

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Author

commented Apr 2, 2013

Made #all_split_files_in follow symlink for up to 10 times, in pull request #300 .

@ddfreyne

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Apr 10, 2013

Implemented in #302.

@ddfreyne ddfreyne closed this Apr 10, 2013

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.