Home
| Calendar
| Mail Lists
| List Archives
| Desktop SIG
| Hardware Hacking SIG
Wiki | Flickr | PicasaWeb | Video | Maps & Directions | Installfests | Keysignings Linux Cafe | Meeting Notes | Linux Links | Bling | About BLU |
On 02/26/2009 10:22 AM, Derek Atkins wrote: > Umm.. as far as NFS is concerned a hardlink of a file is the same > as a copy of the file. The way a hardlink works is that it adds > a second directory entry to the same file inode (which is why it > cannot cross a filesystem boundary -- the inode is unique to the > filesystem). This means you have access to the underlying file > contents from two places in the filesystem (i.e. the link count). > > A symlink, however, is a higher-level mapping which requires going > through the (local) filesystem to find the target inode. So if > you want to limit which files are available then hardlinks are better. > > =20 First a symbolic link is nothing more than a file containing a path. If=20 that path is valid the link works, if it is not, it doesn't. So, if on a = remote system, the target is mounted at a different point the link will=20 not be valid. WRT: Hard links, you are correct, because you are dealing with an actual = file, so you are exporting that file. essentially, the name of every=20 file is a hard link. So, on the target system, if you mount only the=20 directory containing the hard link, it will still work fine. -- Jerry Feldman <gaf-mNDKBlG2WHs at public.gmane.org> Boston Linux and Unix PGP key id: 537C5846 PGP Key fingerprint: 3D1B 8377 A3C0 A5F2 ECBB CA3B 4607 4319 537C 5846
BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups | |
We also thank MIT for the use of their facilities. |