PC Magazine has come out with an interesting utility that taps in Vista's "symbolic links" (whatever they are).

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2347491,00.asp

This is all new to me, and one knowledgeable commenter at the site is having some significant problems that the author has offered to investigate. But assuming that DiskJunction works or can be made to work as advertised, can anyone comment on symbolic link capabilities, what they might do for users that link files can't, and caveats for those who are entering new territory? (Note that while it displays Vista's symlinks, it won't let you delete them, just the ones that it creates.)

Links to technical articles are welcome, but so are well-formed summary comments and personal insights done in plain English by our resident experts.

Why don't you ask a specific question about links? Forget about this program for a while.

Expecting someone to go to another web site to read an article, and then buy (PC Mag sells all their utilities) the utility so they can learn it capabilities just to answer your generic question is a bit of a stretch - don't you think?

--

Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP
Windows Desktop Experience


"mazorj" wrote in message ...

PC Magazine has come out with an interesting utility that taps in Vista's "symbolic links" (whatever they are).

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2347491,00.asp

This is all new to me, and one knowledgeable commenter at the site is having some significant problems that the author has offered to investigate. But assuming that DiskJunction works or can be made to work as advertised, can anyone comment on symbolic link capabilities, what they might do for users that link files can't, and caveats for those who are entering new territory? (Note that while it displays Vista's symlinks, it won't let you delete them, just the ones that it creates.)

Links to technical articles are welcome, but so are well-formed summary comments and personal insights done in plain English by our resident experts.

No, I don't think it's a stretch. First, I did ask specific questions. Second, how do you know what questions you should be asking if it's all new to you? Third, there are some participants who do try to share their knowledge even when it's clear that the poster is in over his head and needs some schooling. I was just trying to draw on the group's collective expertise. If you know about symlinks then you don't even need to go to the article or buy the utility to contribute something for those of us for whom this is unexplored territory. And as to buying it "just to respond to me," how do you know that no one else already has that utility?

Furthermore, posting it here alerts users to the existence of symlinks and a utility that might be of benefit to them. MS is not the sole source of all knowledge and wisdom here.

"Richard Urban" wrote in message ...
Why don't you ask a specific question about links? Forget about this program for a while.

Expecting someone to go to another web site to read an article, and then buy (PC Mag sells all their utilities) the utility so they can learn it capabilities just to answer your generic question is a bit of a stretch - don't you think?

--

Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP
Windows Desktop Experience


"mazorj" wrote in message ...

PC Magazine has come out with an interesting utility that taps in Vista's "symbolic links" (whatever they are).

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2347491,00.asp

This is all new to me, and one knowledgeable commenter at the site is having some significant problems that the author has offered to investigate. But assuming that DiskJunction works or can be made to work as advertised, can anyone comment on symbolic link capabilities, what they might do for users that link files can't, and caveats for those who are entering new territory? (Note that while it displays Vista's symlinks, it won't let you delete them, just the ones that it creates.)

Links to technical articles are welcome, but so are well-formed summary comments and personal insights done in plain English by our resident experts.

http://discuss.pcmag.com/forums/1004.../ShowPost.aspx

--

Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP
Windows Desktop Experience


"mazorj" wrote in message ...
No, I don't think it's a stretch. First, I did ask specific questions. Second, how do you know what questions you should be asking if it's all new to you? Third, there are some participants who do try to share their knowledge even when it's clear that the poster is in over his head and needs some schooling. I was just trying to draw on the group's collective expertise. If you know about symlinks then you don't even need to go to the article or buy the utility to contribute something for those of us for whom this is unexplored territory. And as to buying it "just to respond to me," how do you know that no one else already has that utility?

Furthermore, posting it here alerts users to the existence of symlinks and a utility that might be of benefit to them. MS is not the sole source of all knowledge and wisdom here.

"Richard Urban" wrote in message ...
Why don't you ask a specific question about links? Forget about this program for a while.

Expecting someone to go to another web site to read an article, and then buy (PC Mag sells all their utilities) the utility so they can learn it capabilities just to answer your generic question is a bit of a stretch - don't you think?

--

Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP
Windows Desktop Experience


"mazorj" wrote in message ...

PC Magazine has come out with an interesting utility that taps in Vista's "symbolic links" (whatever they are).

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2347491,00.asp

This is all new to me, and one knowledgeable commenter at the site is having some significant problems that the author has offered to investigate. But assuming that DiskJunction works or can be made to work as advertised, can anyone comment on symbolic link capabilities, what they might do for users that link files can't, and caveats for those who are entering new territory? (Note that while it displays Vista's symlinks, it won't let you delete them, just the ones that it creates.)

Links to technical articles are welcome, but so are well-formed summary comments and personal insights done in plain English by our resident experts.

Thank you, but I already started reading the comments on the PCM page where DiskJunction is posted for downloading. I was able to glean some additional information from http://support.microsoft.com/kb/235128 but that, like most KB articles, is written for programmers, not end users. The 295 other KB hits searching on "symbolic link" also are intended for programmers solving specific problems with symlinks.

So I do have some specific questions as an experienced user who is not a programmer:

1. Are there any categorical "no-no's" for creating symlinks that users should avoid?

2. In layman's terms, are there any standards or best practices for creating symlinks? Ditto for where they should be stored, or do they just exist as keys in the Registry?

3. Can user-created symlinks conflict with existing Vista symlinks? If so, what are some of the possible symptoms and consequences? How does Vista resolve them?

4. According to the KB article, symlinks are a way for Win32 programs to access devices by "symbolically linking" to their NT assigned objects. Does this mean that symlinks have no utility for Win64 programs? And can we assume that any program that automatically installs itself in the Program Files (x86) folder is a Win32 application?

5. Do Win32 programs automatically create their own symlinks as needed? If so, is there a way to find them stored in a file or in the Registry? (The reason being that there is no point in creating a duplicate symlink. Conversely, a program may be made more responsive or useful if you find that doesn't have a needed symlink.)

6. Am I asking in the wrong forum? This seems like the logical choice but I'll gladly repost in another if that's where I'm more likely to get informative responses.

Again, all I'm trying to do here is elicit general information from any knowledgeable participants in the group.

"Richard Urban" wrote in message ...
http://discuss.pcmag.com/forums/1004.../ShowPost.aspx

--

Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP
Windows Desktop Experience


"mazorj" wrote in message ...
No, I don't think it's a stretch. First, I did ask specific questions. Second, how do you know what questions you should be asking if it's all new to you? Third, there are some participants who do try to share their knowledge even when it's clear that the poster is in over his head and needs some schooling. I was just trying to draw on the group's collective expertise. If you know about symlinks then you don't even need to go to the article or buy the utility to contribute something for those of us for whom this is unexplored territory. And as to buying it "just to respond to me," how do you know that no one else already has that utility?

Furthermore, posting it here alerts users to the existence of symlinks and a utility that might be of benefit to them. MS is not the sole source of all knowledge and wisdom here.

"Richard Urban" wrote in message ...
Why don't you ask a specific question about links? Forget about this program for a while.

Expecting someone to go to another web site to read an article, and then buy (PC Mag sells all their utilities) the utility so they can learn it capabilities just to answer your generic question is a bit of a stretch - don't you think?

--

Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP
Windows Desktop Experience


"mazorj" wrote in message ...

PC Magazine has come out with an interesting utility that taps in Vista's "symbolic links" (whatever they are).

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2347491,00.asp

This is all new to me, and one knowledgeable commenter at the site is having some significant problems that the author has offered to investigate. But assuming that DiskJunction works or can be made to work as advertised, can anyone comment on symbolic link capabilities, what they might do for users that link files can't, and caveats for those who are entering new territory? (Note that while it displays Vista's symlinks, it won't let you delete them, just the ones that it creates.)

Links to technical articles are welcome, but so are well-formed summary comments and personal insights done in plain English by our resident experts.

Ok, I'll try to explain this in "user" terms...
Hard links and symbolic links are a traditional
feature of Unix & Linux. People familiar
with those operating systems know lots of practical
uses of links.

Windows does support both kinds of links, but only
on NTFS disks.
Windows legacy filesystem (varieries of FAT) do not support links.

So, users can expect that legacy software can break in various funny
ways when it encounters links.
For example, a program can check for a disk space on a wrong volume,
or, when asked to zip a subtree, will read several whole other disks
linked into this subtree. Not mentioning circular links
It will take some time until majority of Windows users get used to
links, and so will do all software vendors.

Regards,
-- pa

mazorj wrote:

Thank you, but I already started reading the comments on the PCM page
where DiskJunction is posted for downloading. I was able to glean some
additional information from http://support.microsoft.com/kb/235128 but
that, like most KB articles, is written for programmers, not end users.
The 295 other KB hits searching on "symbolic link" also are intended for
programmers solving specific problems with symlinks.

So I do have some specific questions as an experienced user who is not a
programmer:

1. Are there any categorical "no-no's" for creating symlinks that users
should avoid?

2. In layman's terms, are there any standards or best practices for
creating symlinks? Ditto for where they should be stored, or do they
just exist as keys in the Registry?

3. Can user-created symlinks conflict with existing Vista symlinks? If
so, what are some of the possible symptoms and consequences? How does
Vista resolve them?

4. According to the KB article, symlinks are a way for Win32 programs to
access devices by "symbolically linking" to their NT assigned objects.
Does this mean that symlinks have no utility for Win64 programs? And
can we assume that any program that automatically installs itself in the
Program Files (x86) folder is a Win32 application?

5. Do Win32 programs automatically create their own symlinks as
needed? If so, is there a way to find them stored in a file or in the
Registry? (The reason being that there is no point in creating a
duplicate symlink. Conversely, a program may be made more responsive or
useful if you find that doesn't have a needed symlink.)

6. Am I asking in the wrong forum? This seems like the logical choice
but I'll gladly repost in another if that's where I'm more likely to get
informative responses.

Again, all I'm trying to do here is elicit general information from any
knowledgeable participants in the group.


"Richard Urban"
wrote in message
...
http://discuss.pcmag.com/forums/1004.../ShowPost.aspx

--

Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP
Windows Desktop Experience



"mazorj" wrote
in message ...
No, I don't think it's a stretch. First, I did ask specific
questions. Second, how do you know what questions you should be
asking if it's all new to you? Third, there are some
participants who do try to share their knowledge even when it's
clear that the poster is in over his head and needs some
schooling. I was just trying to draw on the group's collective
expertise. If you know about symlinks then you don't even need
to go to the article or buy the utility to contribute something
for those of us for whom this is unexplored territory. And as
to buying it "just to respond to me," how do you know that no
one else already has that utility?

Furthermore, posting it here alerts users to the existence of
symlinks and a utility that might be of benefit to them. MS is
not the sole source of all knowledge and wisdom here.


"Richard Urban"
wrote in
message ...
Why don't you ask a specific question about links? Forget
about this program for a while.

Expecting someone to go to another web site to read an
article, and then buy (PC Mag sells all their utilities) the
utility so they can learn it capabilities just to answer
your generic question is a bit of a stretch - don't you think?

--

Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP
Windows Desktop Experience



"mazorj"
wrote in message
...

PC Magazine has come out with an interesting utility
that taps in Vista's "symbolic links" (whatever they are).

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2347491,00.asp

This is all new to me, and one knowledgeable commenter
at the site is having some significant problems that the
author has offered to investigate. But assuming that
DiskJunction works or can be made to work as advertised,
can anyone comment on symbolic link capabilities,
what they might do for users that link files can't, and
caveats for those who are entering new territory? (Note
that while i t displays Vista's symlinks, it won't let
you delete them, just the ones that it creates.)

Links to technical articles are welcome, but so are
well-formed summary comments and personal insights done
in plain English by our resident experts.

Thanks. I still have a ways to go in understanding how and why (or
how not/why not) I would use symlinks but that's the kind of specific
information I am looking for.

"Pavel A." wrote in message
...
Ok, I'll try to explain this in "user" terms...
Hard links and symbolic links are a traditional
feature of Unix & Linux. People familiar
with those operating systems know lots of practical
uses of links.

Windows does support both kinds of links, but only
on NTFS disks.
Windows legacy filesystem (varieries of FAT) do not support links.

So, users can expect that legacy software can break in various funny
ways when it encounters links.
For example, a program can check for a disk space on a wrong volume,
or, when asked to zip a subtree, will read several whole other
disks linked into this subtree. Not mentioning circular links
It will take some time until majority of Windows users get used to
links, and so will do all software vendors.

Regards,
-- pa

mazorj wrote:

Thank you, but I already started reading the comments on the PCM
page where DiskJunction is posted for downloading. I was able to
glean some additional information from
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/235128 but that, like most KB
articles, is written for programmers, not end users. The 295 other
KB hits searching on "symbolic link" also are intended for
programmers solving specific problems with symlinks. So I do have
some specific questions as an experienced user who is not a
programmer:
1. Are there any categorical "no-no's" for creating symlinks that
users should avoid? 2. In layman's terms, are there any standards
or best practices for creating symlinks? Ditto for where they
should be stored, or do they just exist as keys in the Registry?
3. Can user-created symlinks conflict with existing Vista
symlinks? If so, what are some of the possible symptoms and
consequences? How does Vista resolve them?
4. According to the KB article, symlinks are a way for Win32
programs to access devices by "symbolically linking" to their NT
assigned objects. Does this mean that symlinks have no utility for
Win64 programs? And can we assume that any program that
automatically installs itself in the Program Files (x86) folder is
a Win32 application?
5. Do Win32 programs automatically create their own symlinks as
needed? If so, is there a way to find them stored in a file or in
the Registry? (The reason being that there is no point in creating
a duplicate symlink. Conversely, a program may be made more
responsive or useful if you find that doesn't have a needed
symlink.)
6. Am I asking in the wrong forum? This seems like the logical
choice but I'll gladly repost in another if that's where I'm more
likely to get informative responses.
Again, all I'm trying to do here is elicit general information
from any knowledgeable participants in the group. "Richard Urban"

wrote in message
...
http://discuss.pcmag.com/forums/1004.../ShowPost.aspx

--

Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP
Windows Desktop Experience
"mazorj"
wrote
in message ...
No, I don't think it's a stretch. First, I did ask
specific
questions. Second, how do you know what questions you
should be
asking if it's all new to you? Third, there are some
participants who do try to share their knowledge even when
it's
clear that the poster is in over his head and needs some
schooling. I was just trying to draw on the group's
collective
expertise. If you know about symlinks then you don't even
need
to go to the article or buy the utility to contribute
something
for those of us for whom this is unexplored territory. And
as
to buying it "just to respond to me," how do you know that
no
one else already has that utility?
Furthermore, posting it here alerts users to the existence
of
symlinks and a utility that might be of benefit to them.
MS is
not the sole source of all knowledge and wisdom here.
"Richard Urban"
wrote in
message ...
Why don't you ask a specific question about links?
Forget
about this program for a while.
Expecting someone to go to another web site to read an
article, and then buy (PC Mag sells all their
utilities) the
utility so they can learn it capabilities just to
answer
your generic question is a bit of a stretch - don't you
think?

--

Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP
Windows Desktop Experience
"mazorj"
wrote in message
...
PC Magazine has come out with an interesting
utility
that taps in Vista's "symbolic links" (whatever
they are).

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2347491,00.asp
This is all new to me, and one knowledgeable
commenter
at the site is having some significant problems
that the
author has offered to investigate. But assuming
that
DiskJunction works or can be made to work as
advertised,
can anyone comment on symbolic link capabilities,
what they might do for users that link files can't,
and
caveats for those who are entering new territory?
(Note
that while i t displays Vista's symlinks, it won't
let
you delete them, just the ones that it creates.)
Links to technical articles are welcome, but so
are
well-formed summary comments and personal insights
done
in plain English by our resident experts.