|
|
Back to UserFriendly Strip Comments Index
|
The device, \Device\Harddisk0\D, has a bad block. | by BaruMonkey | 2005-08-04 00:32:18 |
|
Can you boot it with a Linux startup ? | by SciSSorS | 2005-08-04 00:49:18 |
|
If I remember right | by ToLazyToThink | 2005-08-04 01:54:58 |
| I learned about the existence |
by SciSSorS |
2005-08-04 03:19:02 |
only recently, when looking up a menu item saying "paste hard link" in 2xExplorer Z1 (i think that must have been the last "free" version, they upgraded to Explorer^2 or something, which cannot be legally used any more without paying licences)
The refs I found (only few months ogo) pointed out it was only done in "late" NTFS development, though the equivalent "for folders" had existed already. So I interprete that as "for folders, it was there, for files it wasn't but is now"
Maybe I read it wrong, or found an inaccurate ref.
I found a program "junction" which still is in my "to explore" folder, but promised the "folders" part, for "files" the Z2explorer should do the trick.
That one will "copy" files (even directory-wise) over to another folder, without adding to the disk space.
Currently, I'm not using it, but it could be a tool to comply with IT asking to put "everything important" into a folder named "C:\Keep_this" while they are preparing to upgrade all machines of a whole dept.
Well, I did just that: "hardlink" my in-use folder contents to such a directory, and kept all of my shortcuts etc working.
The date (last changed, last accessed ...) on the "junctions" didn't change though, so when the upgrade started to roll out, my files "looked" aged though the content had been continuously updated through the old entrance.
Looked weird to me, but it's a minor disadvantage (unless one starts using automated backups)
Synchronising work "with network servers" cannot be done that way though: the sync will read the "new" date on the wrong file: the content has been updated, but the dates haven't changed, and the date is "older" than yesterdays (half-manual) sync ...
I think it was a clumsy solution to a problem that should not have been one: IF this IT "infrastructure" dept would have provided ample "network storage" and hadn't kept squeezing the old network disks till they were "full", the whole switch would have been a non-issue: "replace the machine, everything needed is on the intranet", instead of "we know the intranet doesn't hold your working docs, because there's no room for storing the changes when documents grow". |
|
[ Reply ] |
|
|
[Todays Cartoon Discussion]
[News Index]
|
|
