I wrote: > scott.marlowe wrote: >> >> I wouldn't assume that. It's been years since I tested it, but back >> then, the command line and all program I used could see the link >> created by ln that came with the resource kit. They were distinctly >> different from the shortcut type of links, in that they seems >> transparent like short cuts in unix generally are. >> >> Do you have the resource kit or the gnu utils from it? > > > The situation appears to be this: > > 1. Soft links are available on NTFS 5 (2K/XP) as Reparse Points via the > DeviceIoControl() function for any application using the standard C > library routines. > > 2. Soft links are available on any filesystem under 95/98/ME/NT4/2K/XP > as OLE streams (.lnk files) for Shell-aware applications. > > 3. Hard links are available on NTFS 5 (2K/XP) via the CreateHardLink() API.
<snip> > 4. Hard links are available on NTFS (NT3.1/NT4) via the BackupWrite() > API by writing a special stream to the NTFS. I also believe (I could be wrong) that for directories, the only two methods of links are the Soft link methods above. So PGXLOG cannot use soft links on a non-XP/2K machine unless it is "Shell-Aware". For example, in a cygwin bash command window: mkdir dir1 ln dir1 dir2 <- Error using Cygwin implementation ln -s dir1 dir2 <- Creates a Shell short-cut (NT4) echo "Hello" > dir1/test.txt cat dir2/test.txt "Hello" <- Cygwin's cat(bash?) is shell short-cut aware Now, in a Windows NT command prompt: notepad dir2\test.txt <- Notepad can't find file notepad dir2.lnk <- Displays link contents That means for a native port with a different PGXLOG directory running on NT4, the only choice *using links* is to make the native port shell short-cut aware. I could be wrong but I don't think so. Mike Mascari [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
