That seems kind of strange to me, but YMMV. I could see that if lchown was defined you'd want to change the symlink, but how you handle the target seems like it should always be the same (i.e. always chown the target, or always avoid it).
In reply to Re: Detecting lchown and falling back to chown
by bluto
in thread Detecting lchown and falling back to chown
by andy314
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |