lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1996]   [Mar]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRE: Kernel TODO list (vfat : shortcuts vs. symbolic links)
On Thu, 28 Mar 1996, Kenneth Albanowski wrote:
> This, unfortunately, isn't very likely as Windows 95 "shortcuts" are
> actually .PIF files. You can view them, more-or-less, as a short batch
> file that runs the original when you run it. Even under Windows 95, they
> don't work to well, and while it _might_, barely, be possible to treat
> shortcuts as symbolic links, going the other way around probably can't
> work at all.

No. Shortcuts are not .PIF files. There are PIF files for DOS
programs, these are called shortcuts, but their are also files with the
extension of .lnk that link to windows programs.
They work pretty well under Windows. They actually work better than
symbolic links do. You can rename or move the target within the same
filesystem and the shortcut will refind the target. Symbolic links will
break with just a rename of the file.
OS/2's shadows do much the same thing and also seem more robust than
symbolic links.


____________________________________________________________________

Mark E. Levitt
Department of Speech Communication, Syracuse University
E-mail: melevitt@syr.edu
Home Page: http://web.syr.edu/~melevitt

PGP fingerprint = B8 A3 AA A6 0F 83 9A BE F2 7A 19 F9 15 79 FE A4
Public key available from http://web.syr.edu/~melevitt/pgpkey.html
____________________________________________________________________




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:36    [W:0.084 / U:0.044 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site