Windows 7 Is there a way to create symlinks?

[Bryce]

Is there a way to create symlinks in Windows 7?

I've got several external hard drives for Media, etc and all and I want to symlink them to the folders in my user's folder. Is there a way to do that? For those who don't know what symlinks are, it's a linux thing, just hoping there's a similar way to do it here. It just links the remote folder with another folder to show it's contents there. I don't want to copy/paste it because that'll be wasting ~140gb of space -_-

 

[unawave]

In Windows it's named "junction points"

Windows 7 can manage "junction points" - but not create or delete.

Download freeware program Junction v1.05 from Microsoft (Mark Russinovich, Sysinternals):
Copy it e.g. to \windows\system32\

Then you are able to create "junction points":
junction.exe "c:\new folder" "d:\path\real folder"

Remove "junction points":
junction.exe -d "c:\new folder"

 

[alan sh]

I'm sure that used to be the SUBST command in DOS days!

 

[Camride]

Why don't you use the built in Library function? You can link as many folders into your document/music/pictures/videos libraries as you want and you don't have to move anything.

 

[Hoffak]

In Windows it's named \"junction points\"

Windows 7 can manage \"junction points\" - but not create or delete.

Download freeware program Junction v1.05 from Microsoft (Mark Russinovich, Sysinternals):
Copy it e.g. to \windows\system32\

Then you are able to create \"junction points\":
junction.exe \"c:\new folder\" \"d:\path\real folder\"

Remove \"junction points\":
junction.exe -d \"c:\new folder\"

Of course Windows 7 can create junction points, just as Vista. Ever heard of

mklink /j <junction_point_name> <target>

AFAIK Mark's program was meant for XP which supported junctions but couldn't create them

 

[Hoffak]

In Windows it's named \"junction points\"

Windows 7 can manage \"junction points\" - but not create or delete.

Download freeware program Junction v1.05 from Microsoft (Mark Russinovich, Sysinternals):
Copy it e.g. to \windows\system32\

Then you are able to create \"junction points\":
junction.exe \"c:\new folder\" \"d:\path\real folder\"

Remove \"junction points\":
junction.exe -d \"c:\new folder\"

No, it's called a "symbolic link" in Windows and you can use the MKLINK command to create one. A junction point is not the same thing as a symlink, the latter also being able to refer to a file as well as a directory.

 

[loathe]

I use symbolic links all the time to keep as many writes off my SSD as I can. There is a little program I use that has a UI rather than just commands. Its called Link Shell Extension (LSE). There is a big guide about all the types of links, what they do and how to set them up, so, make sure you read it. You want to concentrate on the symbolic links though.

 

[larsbrenner]

I'm sure that used to be the SUBST command in DOS days!

No, SUBST is yet another thing. Among others one difference is that SUBST is a memory thing and doesn't touch the disk. In a way I like to think of SUBST as something resembling (a very crude implementation of) logical names in the VMS OS.
(sym)links and junctions are stored on disk.

 

[Hoffak]

I'll try LSE, thanks. I'm looking for something that links to file://///localhost so that I can get rid of every other shortcut, (symbolic) link, junction and URL, on the system. It would be even better without the localhost suffix, just referring to "anything" that can be accessed through the NIC, even if the NIC isn't involved in the actual access of the object. I.E. For example I would access my bank account in the same way I open a .mp3 file on my desktop, all via the start menu.

 

[xiangxianni]

I always use "mklink /D" to create a symbolic link.Seems another tool named "linkd" also can do it.

 

[larsbrenner]

Why don't you use the built in Library function? You can link as many folders into your document/music/pictures/videos libraries as you want and you don't have to move anything.

Which library function ? Is there a seperate API necessary or can you use it to create something that looks like a directory in "%appdata%\microsoft\windows\start menu" to any program but actually transparently redirects any reference to it by a program to a partition on a different disk without having to change the program in any way to support such redirection ?

 

[Camride]

Which library function ? Is there a seperate API necessary or can you use it to create something that looks like a directory in "%appdata%\microsoft\windows\start menu" to any program but actually transparently redirects any reference to it by a program to a partition on a different disk without having to change the program in any way to support such redirection ?

I was confused as to what you were actually looking for. You can kindly ignore my post, it is not what you're looking for.

 

[Mystere]

There's also the ability to mount other partitions within folders, similar to the Linux mount command. If you go into Disk Management, you can right click on a partition, choose "Change Drive Letter and Paths", click the Add or Change button, and "Mount in the following empty NTFS folder", then that partition is available from within a folder anywhere.

 

[dreuzel]

what is meanth here ???


Windows 7 as Vista can handle SYMBLINKS and JUNCTIONS nativeively use mklinkD and delete using the file manager

 

[Radenight]

I use symbolic links all the time to keep as many writes off my SSD as I can. There is a little program I use that has a UI rather than just commands. Its called Link Shell Extension (LSE). There is a big guide about all the types of links, what they do and how to set them up, so, make sure you read it. You want to concentrate on the symbolic links though.

Ok, one thing I haven't had the luxury of trying out yet are SSD's.. From everything I've read the performance seems to be top notch and reliability also seems to be right up there.. However, I keep hearing common things about them like too many writes and formats leads to a very short lifespan.. I have to know, are they really that bad? To me that sounds like they threw efficiency right out the Window.. Or if not efficiency than durability.. Just curious whether or not there really that bad?...

It just seems odd to me and sounds more like they went a step backwards.. I mean look at conventional HDD's, I've got a 40GB that is 16 years old in one of my pc's.. I can't even count the number of times it's been formatted and it's still working just as good as can... It's a tad bit loud of course but works fine still..

 

[loathe]

Ok, one thing I haven't had the luxury of trying out yet are SSD's.. From everything I've read the performance seems to be top notch and reliability also seems to be right up there.. However, I keep hearing common things about them like too many writes and formats leads to a very short lifespan.. I have to know, are they really that bad? To me that sounds like they threw efficiency right out the Window.. Or if not efficiency than durability.. Just curious whether or not there really that bad?...

It just seems odd to me and sounds more like they went a step backwards.. I mean look at conventional HDD's, I've got a 40GB that is 16 years old in one of my pc's.. I can't even count the number of times it's been formatted and it's still working just as good as can... It's a tad bit loud of course but works fine still..

Ok my drive comes with a 2 year warranty, and I predict it will last far longer than that. They have something crazy like 1.5million hours before failure. I feel people are overly concerned about writes, as the drive will be a paper weight in 2 years anyways. The reason I try to keep as many writes of my disk is because they slow the drive down over time. We are all waiting on the TRIM function to become native in Windows, which marks deleted blocks from your disk as empty, as the controller has to delete data from the block before it can write to it again. This process slows the performance. Basically an SSD type of fragmentation.
The good news is Windows 7 already supports TRIM, and the standard has almost been set. I am expecting a firmware update for my drive this month to activate it. So this wont be a concern anymore. There has been a manual TRIM tool out for some time however.

Sort answer is, no, they are not that bad. Naturally people want to preserve them as much as they can, but some far more than others. If you want to know what a "snappy" build of 7 feels like, put one on an SSD.

 

[Radenight]

Ok my drive comes with a 2 year warranty, and I predict it will last far longer than that. They have something crazy like 1.5million hours before failure. I feel people are overly concerned about writes, as the drive will be a paper weight in 2 years anyways. The reason I try to keep as many writes of my disk is because they slow the drive down over time. We are all waiting on the TRIM function to become native in Windows, which marks deleted blocks from your disk as empty, as the controller has to delete data from the block before it can write to it again. This process slows the performance. Basically an SSD type of fragmentation.
The good news is Windows 7 already supports TRIM, and the standard has almost been set. I am expecting a firmware update for my drive this month to activate it. So this wont be a concern anymore. There has been a manual TRIM tool out for some time however.

Sort answer is, no, they are not that bad. Naturally people want to preserve them as much as they can, but some far more than others. If you to know what a \"snappy\" build of 7 feels like, put one on an SSD.

I figured it had something to do with TRIM.. Thanks very much Loathe for clearing that up.. I'm actually going to get a SSD the first week in July.. Any recommendations? I'm looking for something that is fast (obviously) with excellent throughput.. I've heard good things about Intel's and some of OCZ's.. I'm looking to spend around $400-$500 for my first one..

 

[loathe]

I figured it had something to do with TRIM.. Thanks very much Loathe for clearing that up.. I'm actually going to get a SSD the first week in July.. Any recommendations? I'm looking for something that is fast (obviously) with excellent throughput.. I've heard good things about Intel's and some of OCZ's.. I'm looking to spend around $400-$500 for my first one..

The Intel drives are only slightly faster, in more areas than OZC's Vertex, and are considerably more expensive than the Vertex.
Avoid any with JMicron's JMF601 or JMF602 controllers. They are crap.

You really cant look past the Vertex for bang for buck and they are so fast. They use Indillix's "Barefoot" controller and have 64MB cache.

 

[Radenight]

The Intel drives are only slightly faster, in more areas than OZC's Vertex, and are considerably more expensive than the Vertex.
Avoid any with JMicron's JMF601 or JMF602 controllers. They are crap.

You really cant look past the Vertex for bang for buck and they are so fast. They use Indillix's "Barefoot" controller and have 64MB cache.

Sweet, sounds good to me, thank you my friend.. some very useful advice..