for the vista pros: junctions/symlinks under vista

[flexy]

it strikes me as odd that now in Vista we finally have official support for ntfs junctions - but again NOT as a shell extrension (eg. right click ---> new symlink/junction)...but just using a CMD-line tool like mklink. Retarded.

Those toold we have for some time already under XP.

My question now is whether, under Vista, the junction creation is tracked within the OS/Exporer.

Because the big problem with juntions under XP was that you can create them, but explorer did not track them and you needed 3rd party tools which tracked those eg. w/ entries in the NTFS ADs streams.

Meant: if you created a link under XP and then deleteted the LINK in XP it also deleted the targetting folder..which is wrong 🙂

The fact that the symlinks are "access denied" in Vista makes me believe that the solution is not that elegant either....maybe they just "deny" access as a workaround so explorer doesn't delete them..... ?!

Need some more experimenting there.

 

[Rilex]

No, the behaviour you think is "incorrect" is quite correct. When you create a junction, it IS that folder (target), not a symlink/shortcut (which are in essence, pointers). You need to realize that these concepts are different.

IIRC the default symlinks created for compatibility purposes are Access Denied so you don't utilize them, however nothing prevents you from creating symlinks that you do have access to.

 

[Nothinman]

Meant: if you created a link under XP and then deleteted the LINK in XP it also deleted the targetting folder..which is wrong

No, that's the correct behaviour since junctions are analogous to hard links not soft links.

 

[Rilex]

Junctions != Hard Links

Hard Links == File-based links, just like UNIX Hard Links
Junctions == Directory-based links or Directory to physical drive link

 

[Nothinman]

Junctions == Directory-based links or Directory to physical drive link

Which to me says "hard links for directories".

 

[flexy]

btw the vista symlinks are NOT identical to the junctions....very similiar...but there seem to be some minor differences.

I just wish i had a 3rd party tool/shell extension to create real symlinks too...we have them for creating junctions, hard-links etc...but symlinks you still need to use mklink. (Still...i think in reality it wouldnt matter whether you use a junction or a symlink eg for folders)

Anyway woks all fine..i tested around.

i think the fun really starts creating symlinks to other drives/networks/even ftp folders etc.

 

[13Gigatons]

Junctions are for folders in Windows XP and hardlinks are for files. Hardlinks can only exist on the same partition while Folder Junctions can point to other partitions.

The best tool for Windows XP is NTFS linker 2.1 : http://www.elsdoerfer.info/ntfslink/

It tracks the junction and prevents accidental deleting. It also has the added shell entries and can add shortcut overlay to any juction or hardlink so that you can recognize it right away. You can use what ever shortcut overlay that you like from within the program.

 

[flexy]

13g,

sure. I use this under XP. But it doesnt support the symlinks under vista. The symlinks are different to the junctions, tho VERY similiar.

 

[drag]

Originally posted by: 13Gigatons
Junctions are for folders in Windows XP and hardlinks are for files. Hardlinks can only exist on the same partition while Folder Junctions can point to other partitions.

The best tool for Windows XP is NTFS linker 2.1 : http://www.elsdoerfer.info/ntfslink/

It tracks the junction and prevents accidental deleting. It also has the added shell entries and can add shortcut overlay to any juction or hardlink so that you can recognize it right away. You can use what ever shortcut overlay that you like from within the program.

That's pretty innaccurate article you linked to there. A 'files' you see are actually hard links. Every time make a file you generate one hardlink. Having multiple hardlinks is the same as saying your having multiple file names for the same exact file. They all point at the same spot on the harddrive.

For instance you can 'move' file from one directory to another by making a new hardlink from that different directory then deleting the original hardlink. That's basicly how 'mv' works if your moving stuff on the same volume.

As for junction points they resemble symbolic links when your dealing with folders, but junctions are much more limited then symbolic links in their usefullness.

 

[13Gigatons]

Hardlinks:

If you need a file to show up in five different folders and the file is 10MB and you copy it to each folder it would take up 50MB. With hardlinks you can have the file appear in the five different folders but it will only take up 10MB of space.

Junctions / symbolic links:

They are like a proxy, they foward read and write operations to the target. Most applications aren't aware that it is sending to a proxy and not the real file.


Agian I still think NTFS Linker 2.1 is the best tool for Windows XP.