[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: Feature request

From: fj <fj_at_effjay.com>
Date: 2007-09-13 21:16:18 CEST

Stefan Küng wrote:
>
> Those links which work on NTFS5 are not symbolic links but hard links.
> Those are completely different than symbolic links.
>
> Stefan
>
respectfully, Stefan, are these not symbolic links they're talking about?
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa363878.aspx

I googled the terms:

symbolic links windows

and got quite a few returns that discuss symbolic links. many talking
about third party utilities that make the underlying capabilities easier
to access (e.g. http://shell-shocked.org/article.php?id=284, and
http://blog.taragana.com/index.php/archive/how-to-create-hardlinks-junctions-and-symboliclinks-on-windows/),
perhaps most well known is sysinternal's junction.exe (free), and then
there's microsoft's linkd.exe from the win2k resource kit (not free).

Others have pointed out potential operational problems arising out of
having any kind of link in a repository -- I take no issue with that at
all, but this thread seems to have gotten onto whether windows actually
supports various types of links or not, irrespective of the advisability
of having any links in a repository.

I know hard links are different than symbolic links (multiple entries in
a table in the fs, vs a construct that intercepts io), but based on the
info, samples of which I've just provided, I believe I am correct wr2
symbolic links on ntfs5+.

do you still disagree?
- FJ

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tortoisesvn.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tortoisesvn.tigris.org
Received on Thu Sep 13 21:12:45 2007

This is an archived mail posted to the TortoiseSVN Users mailing list.