Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Difference between "Junction points" and "Hard Links" ?

  1. #1
    Carla Lacrosse Guest

    Difference between "Junction points" and "Hard Links" ?

    What is the difference between Junction points and Hard Links?

    I have read a couple of articles about them but it does not become clear.

    Are the following statements correct?

    1.) Junction Points and Hard Links can both point to files AND folders

    2.) Deleting the target file or folder of a Junction Point makes the "second" reference unusable
    Deleting the target file or folder of a Hard Link let the "second" reference still full alive/exist

    3.) Permissions, attributes for Junction Points and originals can be different
    Permissions, attributes for Hard Links and originals are always the same

    Can someone confirm these statements?

    Carla


  2. #2
    PA Bear [MS MVP] Guest

    Re: Difference between "Junction points" and "Hard Links" ?

    Start here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NTFS_junction_point
    --
    ~Robear Dyer (PA Bear)
    MS MVP-IE, Mail, Security, Windows Client - since 2002
    AumHa VSOP & Admin http://aumha.net
    DTS-L http://dts-l.net/

    Carla Lacrosse wrote:
    > What is the difference between Junction points and Hard Links?
    >
    > I have read a couple of articles about them but it does not become clear.
    >
    > Are the following statements correct?
    >
    > 1.) Junction Points and Hard Links can both point to files AND folders
    >
    > 2.) Deleting the target file or folder of a Junction Point makes the
    > "second" reference unusable Deleting the target file or folder of a
    > Hard
    > Link let the "second" reference still full alive/exist
    >
    > 3.) Permissions, attributes for Junction Points and originals can be
    > different Permissions, attributes for Hard Links and originals are
    > always the same
    >
    > Can someone confirm these statements?
    >
    > Carla



  3. #3
    Leonard Grey Guest

    Re: Difference between "Junction points" and "Hard Links" ?

    This is not Homework Helper.
    ---
    Leonard Grey
    Errare humanum est

    Carla Lacrosse wrote:
    > What is the difference between Junction points and Hard Links?
    >
    > I have read a couple of articles about them but it does not become clear.
    >
    > Are the following statements correct?
    >
    > 1.) Junction Points and Hard Links can both point to files AND folders
    >
    > 2.) Deleting the target file or folder of a Junction Point makes the "second" reference unusable
    > Deleting the target file or folder of a Hard Link let the "second" reference still full alive/exist
    >
    > 3.) Permissions, attributes for Junction Points and originals can be different
    > Permissions, attributes for Hard Links and originals are always the same
    >
    > Can someone confirm these statements?
    >
    > Carla
    >


  4. #4
    Pegasus \(MVP\) Guest

    Re: Difference between "Junction points" and "Hard Links" ?


    "Carla Lacrosse" <charly@xml-dev.com> wrote in message
    news:49a85649$0$31870$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net...
    > What is the difference between Junction points and Hard Links?
    >
    > I have read a couple of articles about them but it does not become clear.
    >
    > Are the following statements correct?
    >
    > 1.) Junction Points and Hard Links can both point to files AND folders
    >
    > 2.) Deleting the target file or folder of a Junction Point makes the
    > "second" reference unusable
    > Deleting the target file or folder of a Hard Link let the "second"
    > reference still full alive/exist
    >
    > 3.) Permissions, attributes for Junction Points and originals can be
    > different
    > Permissions, attributes for Hard Links and originals are always the
    > same
    >
    > Can someone confirm these statements?
    >
    > Carla


    You can easily find the answers to your questions by trial and error. An
    overall comment might be in order:
    - The command
    linkd e:\w c:\Windows
    creates a junction point e:\W which reflects the folder structure of
    c:\Windows. This is useful when some application expects to find its files
    in a location other than the physical location.

    - When you create a hard link then you create a second (and perhaps a third
    and a fourth) entry in the directory list(s) of a partition. Since hard
    links are indistinguishable from the real thing, they can cause an
    administrative nightmare: You might delete a large file, yet the disk space
    it consumed it not released - because it is held by a second or third hard
    link in a different folder under a different name.



  5. #5
    Pegasus \(MVP\) Guest

    Re: Difference between "Junction points" and "Hard Links" ?


    "Carla Lacrosse" <charly@xml-dev.com> wrote in message
    news:49a85649$0$31870$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net...
    > What is the difference between Junction points and Hard Links?
    >
    > I have read a couple of articles about them but it does not become clear.
    >
    > Are the following statements correct?
    >
    > 1.) Junction Points and Hard Links can both point to files AND folders
    >
    > 2.) Deleting the target file or folder of a Junction Point makes the
    > "second" reference unusable
    > Deleting the target file or folder of a Hard Link let the "second"
    > reference still full alive/exist
    >
    > 3.) Permissions, attributes for Junction Points and originals can be
    > different
    > Permissions, attributes for Hard Links and originals are always the
    > same
    >
    > Can someone confirm these statements?
    >
    > Carla


    You can easily find the answers to your questions by trial and error. An
    overall comment might be in order:
    - The command
    linkd e:\w c:\Windows
    creates a junction point e:\W which reflects the folder structure of
    c:\Windows. This is useful when some application expects to find its files
    in a location other than the physical location.

    - When you create a hard link then you create a second (and perhaps a third
    and a fourth) entry in the directory list(s) of a partition. Since hard
    links are indistinguishable from the real thing, they can cause an
    administrative nightmare: You might delete a large file, yet the disk space
    it consumed it not released - because it is held by a second or third hard
    link in a different folder under a different name.



  6. #6
    Twayne Guest

    Re: Difference between "Junction points" and "Hard Links" ?

    PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:
    > Start here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NTFS_junction_point
    >
    > Carla Lacrosse wrote:
    >> What is the difference between Junction points and Hard Links?
    >>
    >> I have read a couple of articles about them but it does not become
    >> clear. Are the following statements correct?
    >>
    >> 1.) Junction Points and Hard Links can both point to files AND
    >> folders 2.) Deleting the target file or folder of a Junction Point
    >> makes the
    >> "second" reference unusable Deleting the target file or folder of
    >> a Hard
    >> Link let the "second" reference still full alive/exist
    >>
    >> 3.) Permissions, attributes for Junction Points and originals can be
    >> different Permissions, attributes for Hard Links and originals are
    >> always the same
    >>
    >> Can someone confirm these statements?
    >>
    >> Carla


    Carla,
    Read here:

    --
    --
    How to Post to more than one group:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crossposting




  7. #7
    ju.c Guest

    Re: Difference between "Junction points" and "Hard Links" ?

    Here you go...

    1 = False, Hard Links for files. Junction Points for folders.
    2 = True.
    3 = True.

    Hard link
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_Link

    NTFS junction point
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NTFS_junction_point


    ju.c


    "Carla Lacrosse" <charly@xml-dev.com> wrote in message news:49a85649$0$31870$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net...
    > What is the difference between Junction points and Hard Links?
    >
    > I have read a couple of articles about them but it does not become clear.
    >
    > Are the following statements correct?
    >
    > 1.) Junction Points and Hard Links can both point to files AND folders
    >
    > 2.) Deleting the target file or folder of a Junction Point makes the "second" reference unusable
    > Deleting the target file or folder of a Hard Link let the "second" reference still full alive/exist
    >
    > 3.) Permissions, attributes for Junction Points and originals can be different
    > Permissions, attributes for Hard Links and originals are always the same
    >
    > Can someone confirm these statements?
    >
    > Carla
    >


  8. #8
    VanguardLH Guest

    Re: Difference between "Junction points" and "Hard Links" ?

    Carla Lacrosse wrote:

    > What is the difference between Junction points and Hard Links?
    >
    > I have read a couple of articles about them but it does not become clear.
    >
    > Are the following statements correct?
    >
    > 1.) Junction Points and Hard Links can both point to files AND folders
    >
    > 2.) Deleting the target file or folder of a Junction Point makes the "second" reference unusable
    > Deleting the target file or folder of a Hard Link let the "second" reference still full alive/exist
    >
    > 3.) Permissions, attributes for Junction Points and originals can be different
    > Permissions, attributes for Hard Links and originals are always the same
    >
    > Can someone confirm these statements?


    Note: Inappropriate use of FollowUp-To header was ignored. If you
    cross-post to multiple groups then you decided your post was on-topic to
    all of them and they were related to your post. Don't be rude by
    stealing away the discussion from there. Original newsgroups list
    restored in my reply.


    Regarding your question(s), see:
    http://www.rekenwonder.com/linkmagic.htm#Junction Link
    http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro....mspx?mfr=true
    http://support.microsoft.com/kb/205524
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NTFS_reparse_point
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NTFS_junction_point
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbolic_link
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_link


    Regarding the use of FollowUp-To header:
    <rant>
    Don't use the FollowUp-To header. Posting to, say, 3 newsgroups but
    moving replies to just 1 of them or to a completely different one means
    you disconnect the visitors of those other 2 (or 3) newsgroups from the
    rest of the discussion. If a newsgroup is appropriate for your post
    then it is also appropriate for the replies. Or, converserly, if the
    continued discussion of your post is not appropriate in all the
    newsgroups to which you cross-posted then you should not have posted to
    those other newsgroups in the first place. You are using the
    FollowUp-To header to move replies to YOUR "home" newsgroup but which
    the users of the other newsgroups may not visit. After all, if you
    cross-post and include your "home" newsgroup then you'll see all those
    replies in your home newsgroup and meanwhile all the other users can
    still see the replies in their newsgroup where you decided to also
    publish your post.

    In http://www.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1/, it says, "For a
    cross-post, you may want to set the Followup-To: header line to the most
    suitable group for the rest of the discussion". Read another way, that
    means you disconnect the discussion from all the visitors of the other
    newsgroups to which you decided to publish your post. Why did you
    publish to those other newsgroups if you are going to yank the
    discussion away from those users and perhaps even from the respondents
    you were attempting to elicit? It is exasperating to post a reply and
    never see it in the newsgroup where you read the original post. If your
    post was appropriate for all the groups to which you cross-posted then
    why wouldn't those same groups be appropriate for the replies? To yank
    away the discussion to your "home" group is rude since that is probably
    not the "home" group for your respondents. You wanted replies which may
    require further replies but now your respondents no longer see the
    thread in the newsgroup that they visit to where you published your
    post. Also, the respondents may not know if their reply is appropriate
    in the "home" group that you happen to choose. In general, malcontents
    and spammers use the FollowUp-To header to hide negative replies to
    their flame or spam posts, often sending the replies off to a *.test
    newsgroup. Is that the company of users to which you want to be
    associated?

    There are some cases where FollowUp-To should be used. For example, say
    a newsgroup is supposed to only get used for citing the content of a
    spam e-mail. Discussions about that spam are not supposed to be
    published in that citing newsgroup. Just the exhibits are published
    there. If someone wants to discuss that particular spam, their replies
    should go into a different newsgroup meant for those discussions. I
    believe that is how some of the NANAE newsgroups operate but the
    principle may apply elsewhere; however, it is rare few newsgroups where
    FollowUp-To is appropriate. For the vast majority of newsgroups,
    FollowUp-To is *not* appropriate. If you do not want continue the
    discussion in the other newsgroups then don't cross-post over there to
    only then use FollowUp-To to yank away the continued discussion. If the
    discussion is not appropriate in those other newsgroups then it seems
    you have self-nominated your post to be off-topic and hence spam.

    If you do use the FollowUp-To header, you are expected per netiquette to
    alert the readers of your post that you used that header. Be polite and
    add a note (at the start of your post) saying that you used the header
    (ex., "WARNING: FollowUp-To was used and points to <newsgroup>". You
    might also want to explain why you consider any further discussion in
    the other newsgroups is inappropriate despite your rudeness in posting
    to those other newsgroups. Many times respondents wonder where their
    reply post went because they expect to see it in the group they visited
    and where they read your post. Not all NNTP clients alert the user that
    the poster used the FollowUp-To header. Think about it: you post to
    multiple newsgroups but yank the replies to a different newsgroup than
    where your respondents visited, then you need more help and reply to
    those replies but which are now only in your "home" newsgroup, but the
    respondents won't see their posts nor will they see your replies to them
    asking for more help. FollowUp-To is not required when you cross-post
    since your "home" newsgroup should be one those that were specified in
    the list of newsgroups. You'll watch the discussion in your home
    newsgroup and the respondents or lurkers can watch that same discussion
    in their own newsgroup. If you don't want replies to show up in all the
    newsgroups to which you cross-posted then don't cross-post over there in
    the first place!

    When crossposting, there are not multiple copies of your post that
    wastes bandwidth for each to get them propagated to other NNTP servers
    and there aren't multiple copies of your post consuming disk space. A
    single copy gets sent to the other NNTP servers and a single copy
    resides on each NNTP server with pointers to it to make it show up in
    multiple newsgroups. You aren't saving bandwidth or disk space by
    redirecting replies for a cross-posted message to a single newsgroup.
    You are just being rude to the visitors of the other newsgroups to which
    you cross-posted but tried to yank away the discussion.
    </rant>

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 10-01-2014, 09:40 AM
  2. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 18-05-2010, 12:27 AM
  3. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 25-06-2009, 03:49 AM
  4. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 11-12-2007, 02:08 AM
  5. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 06-11-2007, 01:18 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •