Search Results

Search found 52 results on 3 pages for 'hardlink'.

Page 1/3 | 1 2 3  | Next Page >

  • Windows7 hardlink over two different drives

    - by Sandro
    I am trying to create a hardlink on my C drive that points to a file on my D drive. I open up a terminal with Administrator privileges and try the following: C:\Users\sandro>mklink /H _vimrc D:\sandro-desktop\.vimrc The error that I get is: The system cannot move the file to a different disk drive. When I try a softlink I get the issue that for some reason changes to the link contents aren't reflected on the targeted file. Thank you!

    Read the article

  • Hardlink files not the same

    - by SabreWolfy
    I created a hardlink of a file as follows: ln /path/to/source/file1 /path/to/target/file2 Using md5sum, the two files are identical. After a while, the source file has been modified by another program. The target file does not get "updated". The md5sums are now different. The files are on the same partition of course, otherwise I could not create a link. What I'm trying to do is get a copy of the source file into the target folder (which is versioned), so that I have access to the source file elsewhere. I tried moving the source file to the target folder with a different name and then creating a symlink to it at the source, but the program expecting the file then (somehow) created a file of the name it wanted in the target folder. Ideas?

    Read the article

  • bind (hardlink) one directory to many places

    - by PoltoS
    I need to "bind" one directory to many chrooted places. I know that I can do "mount -o bind", but this requires special processing on startup each time (run the mount). Is there a way to do it on the filesystem directly? My fs is ext4 and it seems not to support hardlinks to directories. Hardlinking all files inside is not an option too. Is thee a way to enable hardlinks to directories in ext4? Or any other options are avilable?

    Read the article

  • fsutil hardlink doesn't work?

    - by Alix Axel
    I was looking for a way to create hard links under Windows and I found this page: http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc788097.aspx To try it out, I created a file (1.txt) on the root of my C: drive with 100 lines of the following content: C:\1.txt (2.598 bytes): test test test test test Then I open the command prompt and type: fsutil hardlink create C:\2.txt C:\1.txt Success, 2.txt was created but when I go to see it's size it has exactly 2.598 bytes and also noticed some strange behaviours (as far as my understanding of hard links goes): If I delete 2.txt (the hard linked file) 1.txt is not deleted, and vice-versa. If I open 2.txt after I delete 1.txt (the original file) the content is still the same. How does the fsutil hardlink create command differs from the copy command? And how can I create a true hard link under Windows? I'm using Windows XP SP 3, and my file system is NTFS.

    Read the article

  • replace file with hardlink to another file atomically

    - by Ben Clifford
    I have two directory entries, a and b. Before, a and b point to different inodes. Afterwards, I want b to point to the same inode as a does. I want this to be safe - by which I mean if I fail somewhere, b either points to its original inode or the a inode. most especially I don't want to end up with b disappearing. mv is atomic when overwriting. ln appears to not work when the destination already exists. so it looks like i can say: ln a tmp mv tmp b which in case of failure will leave a 'tmp' file around, which is undesirable but not a disaster. Is there a better way to do this? (what I'm actually trying to do is replace files that have identical content with a single inode containing that content, shared between all directory entries)

    Read the article

  • Skipping hardlinks when using TSM Backup

    - by Lars Haugseth
    We need to backup a filesystem with lots of hardlinks. Since there are several hardlinks for each "true" file, we would like to skip all the hardlinks when backing up the filesystem to avoid n exact copies of each file. The backup is done using Tivoli Storage Manager Backup, and we've been unable to get it to treat hardlinks as anything other than separate files to be backed up alongside each other. In case it's relevant for possible solutions, I'd like to note that it's possible to tell a hardlink from a proper file by the filename: foobarbaz-123.ext # file foobarbaz-123-1.ext # hardlink foobarbaz-123-2.ext # hardlink barbazfoo-456.ext # file barbazfoo-456-1.ext # hardlink barbazfoo-456-2.ext # hardlink barbazfoo-456-3.ext # hardlink That is, all hardlinks have two hyphens in the filename, where as proper files have just the one. The server is running Ubuntu Linux, and the files are situated on a gfs volume on our SAN.

    Read the article

  • Break all hardlinks within a folder

    - by Georges Dupéron
    I have a folder which contains a certain number of files which have hard links (in the same folder or somewhere else), and I want to de-hardlink these files, so they become independant, and changes to their contents won't affect any other file (their link count becomes 1). Below, I give a solution which basically copies each hard link to another location, then move it back in place. However this method seems rather crude and error-prone, so I'd like to know if there is some command which will de-hardlink a file for me. Crude answer : Find files which have hard links (Edit: To also find sockets, etc. that have hardlinks, use find -not -type d -links +1) : find -type f -links +1 A crude method to de-hardlink a file (copy it to another location, and move it back) : Edit: As Celada said, it's best to do a cp -p below, to avoid loosing timestamps and permissions. Edit: Create a temporary directory and copy to a file under it, instead of overwriting a temp file, it minimizes the risk to overwrite some data, though the mv command is still risky (thanks @Tobu). # This is unhardlink.sh set -e for i in "$@"; do temp="$(mktemp -d ./hardlnk-XXXXXXXX)" [ -e "$temp" ] && cp -ip "$i" "$temp/tempcopy" && mv "$temp/tempcopy" "$i" && rmdir "$temp" done So, to un-hardlink all hard links (Edit: changed -type f to -not -type d, see above) : find -not -type d -links +1 -print0 | xargs -0 unhardlink.sh

    Read the article

  • Unix: softlinks, hardlinks

    - by sixtyfootersdude
    I am somewhat confused what the differences between a softlink, and a hardlink are (on unix). It seems like a softlink is the same as a shortcut in windows or an alias on Mac OS X. (Can someone confirm this?) Softlinks can link to both directories and files. I am uncertain of what a hardlink does or if it is useful.. Is it better to use one instead of the other? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • How do I delete hardlinks, symbolic links, junction points, etc please?

    - by jonny
    I could be wrong, but I'm yet to hear a valid argument for the exploitability that these things deliver...outweighing their very dubious / debatable functionality. They seem to me to be marginally handy, but I don't think I have any need for them. I do have a need for security, however. How can I delete their entire functionality permanently from my hard drive, please? Microsoft only has pages on how to create them; which seems almost peculiar to the point of being dubious (at least, to me...) And just a dumb command line question, am I correct in assuming fsutil hardlink list c: will enumerate every single hardlink on that drive? C:\Windows\system32>fsutil hardlink list c: \Windows\System32 Also, how do I delete symbolic links please ;) But I'd just rather have all symbolic linking and recursion-creating stuff removed, if that's possible? C:\Windows\system32>fsutil behavior query symlinkevaluation Local to local symbolic links are enabled. Local to remote symbolic links are enabled. Remote to local symbolic links are disabled. Remote to remote symbolic links are disabled.

    Read the article

  • What are the pitfalls of hardlinked files on my desktop PC?

    - by MountainX
    All the identical-content files on my PC are now hardlinked. (My data is completely de-duplicated. It is a consequence of the way I copied my data from my old computer.) What pitfalls do I need to be aware of now that certain actions on one file could silently affect a number of other files? I know that deleting the file I'm working on is not a problem (assuming I deleted it on purpose). It doesn't affect any of the other hardlinked files and I don't see that the delete action would lead to unexpected side effects. Moving or renaming the file is not a problem. I don't see any unexpected consequences. I don't think copying hardlinked files is a problem, but I'm not as confident about any unexpected consequences in this regard. What I have seen is that making a copy (to the same disk) of a hardlinked file with cp keeps the copy hardlinked (i.e., inode number doesn't change in the copy). Copying to another filesystem obviously breaks the hardlink. (I guess one pitfall is forgetting this fact, given that my PC has 3 hard disks.) Changing permissions does affect all linked files. So far this has proven handy. (I made a large number of the hardlinked files read-only.) None of the operations above seem to produce any major unexpected consequences. However, as was pointed out to me by Daniel Beck in a comment, editing or modifying a file can sometimes be a problem. It depends on the tool and maybe the type of edit. (For example, editing small text files using sed seems to always break the link while using nano doesn't.) This introduces the chance that editing one file could affect all the hardlinked files (i.e., alter the original inode). My proposed solution to this is to make all hardlinked files read-only (and that is already mostly the case). If I can't do that for some files, I will unlink those particular files. Is there any problem with this read-only approach? I'm assuming that if I go to edit a file and find it to be read-only, I'll remember to unlink that filename while making it writable. So one pitfall might be forgetting this rule. In that case, I'll have to rely on my backups. Am I correct in the above statements? And what else do I need to know? BTW, I'm running Kubuntu 12.04. I'm also using btrfs. (I have 2 SSD's and 1 HDD in the PC. I will also be adding an external USB HDD. I'm also connected to a network and I mount some NFS shares. I don't assume any of these last bits are relevant to the question, but I'm adding them just in case.) BTW, since I have more than one drive (with separate file systems), to unlink any file all I have to do is copy it to another drive, then move it back. However, using sed also works (in my testing). Here's my script: sed -i 's/\(.\)/\1/' file1 Surprisingly, this even unlinks zero byte files. In my testing it also appears to work on non-text files without any special options. (But I understand that the --binary option might be needed on Windows, MS-DOS and Cygwin.) However, copying to another disk and moving back may be the best way to unlink. For my use-case, unlink command doesn't really "unlink", rather it "removes".

    Read the article

  • Hard link and Symbolic links in Unix

    - by darkie15
    Hi All, I just wanted to clarify if a hard/symbolic link is actually a file that is created ?? I ran the command: ln source hardlink ln -s source softlink -- The ls command shows this 2 links as a file. So my query is, does ln / ln -s actually create a file? Regards, Shyam

    Read the article

  • How to improve this bash shell script for turning hardlinks into symlinks?

    - by MountainX
    This shell script is mostly the work of other people. It has gone through several iterations, and I have tweaked it slightly while also trying to fully understand how it works. I think I understand it now, but I don't have confidence to significantly alter it on my own and risk losing data when I run the altered version. So I would appreciate some expert guidance on how to improve this script. The changes I am seeking are: make it even more robust to any strange file names, if possible. It currently handles spaces in file names, but not newlines. I can live with that (because I try to find any file names with newlines and get rid of them). make it more intelligent about which file gets retained as the actual inode content and which file(s) become sym links. I would like to be able to choose to retain the file that is either a) the shortest path, b) the longest path or c) has the filename with the most alpha characters (which will probably be the most descriptive name). allow it to read the directories to process either from parameters passed in or from a file. optionally, write a long of all changes and/or all files not processed. Of all of these, #2 is the most important for me right now. I need to process some files with it and I need to improve the way it chooses which files to turn into symlinks. (I tried using things like the find option -depth without success.) Here's the current script: #!/bin/bash # clean up known problematic files first. ## find /home -type f -wholename '*Icon* ## *' -exec rm '{}' \; # Configure script environment # ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ set -o nounset dir='/SOME/PATH/HERE/' # For each path which has multiple links # ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ # (except ones containing newline) last_inode= while IFS= read -r path_info do #echo "DEBUG: path_info: '$path_info'" inode=${path_info%%:*} path=${path_info#*:} if [[ $last_inode != $inode ]]; then last_inode=$inode path_to_keep=$path else printf "ln -s\t'$path_to_keep'\t'$path'\n" rm "$path" ln -s "$path_to_keep" "$path" fi done < <( find "$dir" -type f -links +1 ! -wholename '* *' -printf '%i:%p\n' | sort --field-separator=: ) # Warn about any excluded files # ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ buf=$( find "$dir" -type f -links +1 -path '* *' ) if [[ $buf != '' ]]; then echo 'Some files not processed because their paths contained newline(s):'$'\n'"$buf" fi exit 0

    Read the article

  • 7-zip archive with hard links?

    - by Steven Penny
    I see that tar respects hard links $ ln clonezilla.iso test.iso $ tar cfvvJ archive.tar.xz *.iso -rw-r--r-- Steven 111149056 2012-03-25 07:34 clonezilla.iso hrw-r--r-- Steven 0 2012-03-25 07:34 test.iso link to clonezilla.iso 7-Zip does not do this $ 7z a -mx=9 archive.7z *.iso $ ls -l -rw-r--r-- 1 Steven 212827496 Apr 17 07:40 archive.7z -rw-r--r-- 1 Steven 105073772 Apr 17 07:38 archive.tar.xz Is there a way to make 7-Zip respect hard links? gnu.org/software/tar/manual/html_node/hard-links

    Read the article

  • I need to create a volume/symbolic link from a UNC Path

    - by Sebas
    I have a workstation with Windows XP and I need to make a symbolic link or mount a UNC Path like a local Drive. I need the same behavior that produces M-Daemon tools when you mount an .iso File but with a remote directory. This is because I have a software client that perform several task but only with local drives and directorys. The remote UNC path is a NAS server, thats the why I need to perform all the tasks from a workstations. Thanks a lot!

    Read the article

  • How many hardlinks in a drive?

    - by acidzombie24
    I made a backup of one of my external drives to another. They are both NTFS filesystems. I moved ALL disk contents into a folder called a and right clicked to get file/folder/size count. They are exactly the same. However windows reports J having 1.33gb (backup) and Q: as 521mb. Now I think maybe its because of hardlinks, I must have more on J then Q. How might I figure out how many hardlinks I have in a drive?

    Read the article

  • Is there a way to create a copy-on-write copy of a directory?

    - by BCS
    I'm thinking of a situation where I would have something that creates a copy of a directory, tweaks a few files, and then does some processing on the result. This wold be done fairly often, maybe a few dozen times a day. (The exact use case is testing patch submissions; dupe the code, patch it, build/test/report/etc.) What I'm looking for could be done by creating a new directory structure and populating it with hard links from the origonal. However this only works if all the tools you use delete and recreate files rather than edit them in place. Is there a way to have the file system do copy-on-write for a file? Note: I'm aware that many FSs use COW at a block level (all updates are done via writes to new blocks) but this is not what I want.

    Read the article

  • hardlinking takes a lot of space

    - by mr_schlomo
    I made an rsync incremental backup script for my server that will copy a MySQL database backup and a specified folder path to a remote server. Here's the code on Github. Code excerpt from lines 53-57: ############### Create most current hand link echo "Creating most current hard link on backup server $most_recent_backup_link" ssh $remote_backup_server rm -rf ${most_recent_backup_link} ssh $remote_backup_server cp -alv ${remote_backup_folder}/backup-${backup_folder_name}/ ${most_recent_backup_link} I'm having a problem with creating the most current hard links on the backup server (lines 53-57 in the program). Everything works, and rsync only copies about 1-2MB of data. But the hard link copy process uses about 30MB of data. I get a huge laundry list of files that haven't changed and the only ones that have changed are very small in size. Normally this isn't a problem, but when you backup every hour, the backup should be as small as possible. For example, the last backup I did, rsync transferred 1.3MB. But the backup directory grew 35MB. Why are the hard links taking up so much hard drive space?

    Read the article

  • How to mirror filesystems with millions of hardlinks?

    - by Thomas Berger
    We have one big problem at the moment: We need to mirror a filesystem for one of our customers. Thats usual not really a problem, but here it is: On this filesystem there is one folder with millions of hardlinks (yes! MILLIONS!). rsync requires more then 4 days to just build the filelist. We use the following rsync options: rsync -Havz --progress serverA:/data/cms /data/ Has anyone a idea how to speed up this rsync, or use alternatives? We could not use dd as the target disk is smaller then the source.

    Read the article

  • Hard link not works under MacOS in GUI mode

    - by AntonAL
    Hi, i faced a little strange behavior, while using hard links. From terminal, i create a text file 1.txt and a hard link "to this file" nano 1.txt mkdir dir ln 1.txt ./dir/ I check the resulting hard link and see that its contents are the same as of the original file. less ./dir/1.txt I change the initial file ... nano 1.txt ... and see, that changes was reflected in hard-link less ./dir/1.txt I change content of hard-link (more correct, of course - file, being referenced with hard-link) ... nano ./dir/1.txt ... and see, that changes are reflected in initial file less 1.txt Until now, all going well... Now, I close terminal and start playing with created files (1.txt and ./dir/1.txt) from Finder. When i change on this two files with TextEdit, changes are not reflected in another file. Just like the hard link was teared off... What is going on here ?

    Read the article

  • How do I create a symbolic link to a UNC Path in Windows XP

    - by Sebas
    I have a workstation with Windows XP and I need to make a symbolic link or mount a UNC Path like a local Drive. I need the same behavior that produces M-Daemon tools when you mount an .iso File but with a remote directory. This is because I have a software client that perform several task but only with local drives and directorys. The remote UNC path is a NAS server, thats the why I need to perform all the tasks from a workstations.

    Read the article

  • Executing symbolic link to exe - "The specified path does not exist"

    - by basic6
    When trying to execute a symbolic link which points to an exe file (on Windows 7), the "Open with" windows appears. When renaming it to a ".exe" file, it says "The specified path does not exist. Check the path, and then try again.". Symlinks to other destinations seem to work fine. I know that because hard links are a reference to the file's inode, they do not have this issue. But because of their disadvantages (like replacing "target file" not possible), I avoid hard links. And Windows shortcuts (lnk files) aren't filesystem links. Although I haven't had any trouble with them yet, I'd rather avoid them as well. So is there any way to execute a symlink?

    Read the article

  • How can one undo many hard links?

    - by tOM Trottier
    I foolishly used Dupemerge to change all my duplicate files into hard links. Now Windows XP is not running right, eg, explorer won't start. Is there a utility which would traverse the filesystem looking for hard links, copy the file, delete the original link, and rename the copy, keeping the original attributes and name?

    Read the article

  • Is there a Windows 7 equivalent to the *NIX ability to create a hard link to /dev/null?

    - by minameismud
    I saw another question here that the Windows equivalent to /dev/null is simply NUL. I also know that you can use the mklink command to make sym links (shortcuts) from the command line: MKLINK [[/D] | [/H] | [/J]] Link Target /D Creates a directory symbolic link. Default is a file symbolic link. /H Creates a hard link instead of a symbolic link. /J Creates a Directory Junction. Link specifies the new symbolic link name. Target specifies the path (relative or absolute) that the new link refers to. When I try to use the /j switch to make a hard link ("junction") instead of a simple shortcut to NUL, I get: C:\>mklink /j "C:\Program Files\MyNewHardlinkFolder" NUL Local volumes are required to complete the operation. I can create shortcuts to NUL all day long using the /d switch, but I would much prefer the hard link. Any ideas?

    Read the article

1 2 3  | Next Page >