Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 4th Nov 2010 22:40 UTC, submitted by rhyder
Thread beginning with comment 448861
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Features
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/13/13 14:35 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/11/13 17:07 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/10/13 23:13 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/08/13 14:57 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/07/13 11:40 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/04/13 12:45 UTC
Linked by nfeske on 05/31/13 10:12 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/29/13 16:59 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 17:26 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:38 UTC
More Features »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-07-11
You could also use hard links, which would be a technically better solution.
Yes, the indexer must run continuously to create the links. As Neolander said, this is not all bad because it means the work is then done only once, and the "search" is zero cost.
Not true. Most X11 file managers will show the correct file icon, but with a symlink overlay (a small arrow). Some let you turn off the overlay if you wish. Use hard links rather than symlinks, and this issue is gone for sure.
Aha, yes because you want the file to exist in multiple folders, not to have multiple names.
Like I mentioned in another post, one usability issue with hard links that need to be fixed is that you must traverse the directory tree to find links to the same file. If finding the links to an inode was fast, the file manager could easily let you 1) remove all hard links to a file 2) rename all hard links when you rename one of them.
Not so with hard links.