home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!usc!enterpoop.mit.edu!eru.mt.luth.se!lunic!sunic!aun.uninett.no!Steinar.Haug
- From: Steinar.Haug@delab.sintef.no (Steinar Haug)
- Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc
- Subject: Re: Diff between sym and hard links?
- Message-ID: <STEINAR.HAUG.93Jan9160031@delab.sintef.no>
- Date: 9 Jan 93 15:00:31 GMT
- References: <mcampbel.726585766@eola.cs.ucf.edu>
- Sender: news@aun.uninett.no
- Distribution: comp
- Organization: SINTEF DELAB, Trondheim, Norway.
- Lines: 26
- In-Reply-To: mcampbel@cs.ucf.edu's message of Sat, 9 Jan 1993 13:22:46 GMT
- Nntp-Posting-Host: tosca.er.sintef.no
-
- > Anyone? What *is* the difference between symbolic and hard links in a
- > unix fs?
-
- Hmm, how about reading the manual pages? Okay, I'll save you the trouble.
-
- - A symlink contains the (relative or absolute) pathname of a file. The file
- can be in another file system. If the file is moved, the symlink is no longer
- valid, because the file has a new pathname.
-
- - A hard link contains the *inode* number of a file, and thus is only valid
- within the file system where the file is located. If the file is moved within
- this file system, the hard link remains valid.
-
- A further point to note is that there is no way to tell the difference between
- the "original" name of a file, and any further hard links to that file. They
- are all simply links to the same file. When the link count for a file goes to
- zero, the operating system removes the file.
-
- There are people who don't like symlinks, are there are versions of Unix which
- don't implement symlinks. Personally, I consider it *essential* for efficient
- system administration of large installations to have symlinks available.
-
- Steinar Haug, system/networks administrator
- SINTEF DELAB, University of Trondheim, NORWAY
- Email: Steinar.Haug@delab.sintef.no,
- sthaug@idt.unit.no, steinar@tosca.er.sintef.no
-