Hi, in gentoo-upgrading.xml, code listings 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, 3.6, 3.8 and 3.9 a CWD of /*/ is assumed. I think there should be either absolute paths to the profile, e.g.: ln -s ../usr/portage/profiles/[...] should be ln -s /usr/portage/profiles/[...] or there should be hints to change the directory to (e.g.) /etc, to make sure the relative paths are valid, e.g.: rm /etc/make.profile ln -s ../usr/portage/profiles/[...] should be cd /etc rm make.profile ln -s ../usr/portage/profiles/[...] Code listing 3.7 also shows a relative path, but this looks O.K. here because there already is a "cd /etc" before it. But maybe this should be changed as well for consistency? Attaching two patches, one keeping relative paths and adding "cd /etc" where appropriate, and one changing to absolute paths (leaving code listing 3.7 alone).
Created attachment 114474 [details, diff] making all paths absolute
Created attachment 114475 [details, diff] making all paths relative
The /etc/make.profile symlink is an absolute path, you do not have to cd anywhere before you create it, and .. is not relative to the CWD when you create the symlink. You might want to read `man ln` again.
err, no, the links are still relative links ... but the rest of your comments are true
(In reply to comment #4) > err, no, the links are still relative links ... but the rest of your comments > are true hmm, I didn't say otherwise, did I? Unless you want to call /etc/make.profile a relative path :)
(In reply to comment #3) > The /etc/make.profile symlink is an absolute path, you do not have to cd > anywhere before you create it, and .. is not relative to the CWD when you > create the symlink. You are right, of course... Stupid me. Sorry for the noise. > You might want to read `man ln` again. Done. ;)
