On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 08:41:31AM -0800, Dos-Man 64 wrote:
> Well, it's interesting but confusing.  And in any case, I need a book
> because six months from now I won't remember anything that went on in
> this thread :)
> 
> I'm wondering if the desktop "shortcuts" that you can create in X are
> traditional links, or a more complex link with differences?
> 
> 
> 
> On Mar 3, 11:36 pm, Blues Renegade <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Thanks for the clarification, Daniel! Why use hard links at all? They
> > must exist for a reason, but I have yet to encounter a need that ONLY a
> > hard link could fill. In commercial UNIX apps I've installed I've only
> > ever seen soft links used by the software vendor, never hard links. What
> > am I missing here?
> >
> > Thanks again, Daniel! Despite my error on hard links, I do hope DOS-MAN
> > got something out of all I wrote on soft links, or I wasted my time.
> >
> > John
> >
> >
> >
> > Daniel Eggleston wrote:
> > > An important point that should be made: a link is always a link, and
> > > never a copy!  A hard link is not a copy. A hard link is a duplicate
> > > inode pointer, so both are "real" files.  i.e.:
> >
> > > $ echo "foo" > fileA
> > > $ ln fileA fileB
> > > $ ln -s fileA fileC
> > > $ cat file B
> > > foo
> > > $ echo "bar" > fileA
> > > $ cat fileB
> > > bar
> > > $ cat fileC
> > > bar
> > > $ rm fileA
> > > $ cat fileB
> > > bar
> > > $ cat fileC
> > > *error*
> >
> > > The difference between a hard link and a soft link is, the soft link
> > > points to a file by name.  A hard link points by inode, so after you
> > > remove the original file, it still exists with the second filename.  
> > > But they're not separate copies, they're the same file!
> >
> > > On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 7:32 AM, Blues Renegade
> > > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> >
> > >     I think you're making it much harder for yourself by mentally
> > >     cross-referencing everything in Linux back to your DOS/Windows
> > >     knowledge. You'll have a much easier time if you "forget" about
> > >     DOS/Windows and approach Linux like a kid learning about computers
> > >     for the first time.
> >
> > >     When I first got into Linux, I decided to go back to where Linux
> > >     came from and picked up some old UNIX books where everything was
> > >     done on the command line, they didn't even have an X-server yet,
> > >     and to this day, most UNIX server admins run a console-system
> > >     only, no GUI!  Most would never dream of using a GUI, seeing it as
> > >     a headache; more programs and config files to break and wreak
> > >     havoc on the server's stability.
> >
> > >     As for links, they are fairly straightforward. There are 2 kinds:
> > >     hard links and soft links.
> >
> > >     A hard link is actually just a copy of a file. Personally, I have
> > >     never used hard links. I use cp -a (-a archives a file with its
> > >     original date/time and preserves ownership and permissions) if I
> > >     want to duplicate files.
> >
> > >     A soft link is a shortcut to a file; under the covers it's nothing
> > >     more than a pointer that contains the path to where the file exists.
> >
> > >     IMPORTANT! The path it stores is the text you enter when you
> > >     create the link. The ln command does NOT try and validate your
> > >     path. The UNIX/Linux philosophy is that commands are small
> > >     programs with a very specific purpose. If you want/need more
> > >     functionality, then you are expected to combine the commands using
> > >     piping and/or redirection to get the job done. Once you learn
> > >     enough commands and know how to combine them, the light bulb will
> > >     go on and you'll realize the true power of UNIX (in our case, Linux).
> >
> > >     CREATING LINKS:
> >
> > >     For example, you're in your home directory and you want a quick
> > >     way to 'cd' to a /home/dos-man/programming/c/linux/utilities.
> >
> > >     Here's a FLAWED WAY of creating a soft link... I'm showing you a
> > >     pitfall first:
> >
> > >     ln -s ./programming/c/linux/utilities/ c-utils
> >
> > >     ln = link command
> >
> > >     -s  = soft link (shortcut, pointer, stored path, however you want
> > >     to remember it)
> >
> > >     ./programming/c/linux/utilities = a relative path (relative
> > >     reference) to the directory utilities
> >
> > >     The period at the beginning points to the current directory. (Not
> > >     very exact is it?!)
> >
> > >     c-utils = the filename of your link (shortcut) i.e. this is what
> > >     you'll use with cd to save typing that long path
> >
> > >     You're working away in /home/dos-man/programming/c/dos/ and you
> > >     decide to go work on a linux utility, so you run:
> >
> > >     cd c-utils
> >
> > >     and surprise, it fails!
> >
> > >     What it does is try to cd from your current directory to your
> > >     link's path. The cd command replaces the period in the link with
> > >     your current directory and tries to change to the new "fangled"
> > >     (mangled is more like it) path:
> >
> > >     It's as though you entered:
> >
> > >     cd  /home/dos-man/programming/c/dos/programming/c/linux/utilities/
> >
> > >     No such path exists on your system (and if by chance it does, then
> > >     you're not where you expect to be!!).
> >
> > >     ****  TIP: When creating softlinks, include the complete path (AKA
> > >     absolute reference).
> >
> > >     To fix the problem above, rm c-utils to remove the link you created.
> >
> > >     Re-create it with the complete path this time (an absolute reference).
> >
> > >     ln -s /home/dos-man/programming/c/linux/utilities/ c-utils
> >
> > >     **** TIP: It's a good idea to include the trailing slash when
> > >     creating links to directories, so when you look at the link with
> > >     'ls -l', you'll know it's pointing to a directory.
> >
> > >     Hope that helps you to start using links right away.
> >
> > >     BEST TIP OF ALL: Forget registries, forget Windows, forget DOS,
> > >     and you'll have a much easier time learning Linux!! Start fresh;
> > >     after all, UNIX came first, then MS-DOS borrowed heavily from UNIX
> > >     and ended up as a very watered down proprietary sub-set with some
> > >     subtle (proprietary?).
> >
> > >     Many of the commands in UNIX were never replicated in DOS, so they
> > >     will be completely new to you. New concepts and ways of thinking
> > >     to grasp. While DOS had piping and redirection, without a rich
> > >     command set you were still very limited in comparison to UNIX.
> >
> > >     John- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > - Show quoted text -
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Linux Users Group.
> To post a message, send email to [email protected]
> To unsubscribe, send email to [email protected]
> For more options, visit our group at 
> http://groups.google.com/group/linuxusersgroup

I don't know about more complex... but you can open the file in a text
editor (at least for gnome/kde/xfce).  It's a description of the
executable location, icon location, launch feedback desired, etc.

the real file won't be 'Firefox', it'll probably be 'Firefox.desktop' in
your ~/Desktop folder.  Check it out from a console sometime.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Linux Users Group.
To post a message, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe, send email to [email protected]
For more options, visit our group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/linuxusersgroup

Reply via email to