F5F Stay Refreshed Software Operating Systems Yes, you can use symbolic links depending on your needs. They help reference files or directories without copying them.

Yes, you can use symbolic links depending on your needs. They help reference files or directories without copying them.

Yes, you can use symbolic links depending on your needs. They help reference files or directories without copying them.

Pages (2): Previous 1 2
C
Coolcat092703
Junior Member
2
02-06-2016, 01:26 AM
#11
I attempted that but it didn't resolve the issue. The system reported a permission error when trying to create the symbolic link. I also used commands to set ownership and permissions, but the link creation failed.
C
Coolcat092703
02-06-2016, 01:26 AM #11

I attempted that but it didn't resolve the issue. The system reported a permission error when trying to create the symbolic link. I also used commands to set ownership and permissions, but the link creation failed.

P
PisulasRule
Senior Member
676
02-06-2016, 02:38 AM
#12
This message indicates an issue with the operation, suggesting a possible configuration or environment problem. Consider checking Apache settings on Freenode.
P
PisulasRule
02-06-2016, 02:38 AM #12

This message indicates an issue with the operation, suggesting a possible configuration or environment problem. Consider checking Apache settings on Freenode.

N
NaviPixel
Member
68
02-06-2016, 03:47 AM
#13
I'm starting there. It's worth noting I experimented with creating folders inside ~/ individually and connecting them, which succeeded. Perhaps the issue relates to how the system mounts things.
N
NaviPixel
02-06-2016, 03:47 AM #13

I'm starting there. It's worth noting I experimented with creating folders inside ~/ individually and connecting them, which succeeded. Perhaps the issue relates to how the system mounts things.

N
179
02-25-2016, 09:45 PM
#14
No, it wouldn't work. Running `rm -rf` deletes files forcefully without confirmation, and `mkdir` alone creates a directory but doesn't remove anything.
N
NicknameNumber
02-25-2016, 09:45 PM #14

No, it wouldn't work. Running `rm -rf` deletes files forcefully without confirmation, and `mkdir` alone creates a directory but doesn't remove anything.

D
da_mitch
Member
147
02-27-2016, 10:32 AM
#15
Yes, the issue persisted as expected. It might be related to /mnt/server being a Windows server and how it handles symlinks. I plan to use the mount command instead of relying on the plug 'n play method. Although it adds extra steps if needed, it should resolve the problem. Still, the error remains puzzling. Appreciate the guidance! I'll continue experimenting just in case it becomes functional.
D
da_mitch
02-27-2016, 10:32 AM #15

Yes, the issue persisted as expected. It might be related to /mnt/server being a Windows server and how it handles symlinks. I plan to use the mount command instead of relying on the plug 'n play method. Although it adds extra steps if needed, it should resolve the problem. Still, the error remains puzzling. Appreciate the guidance! I'll continue experimenting just in case it becomes functional.

J
Jerryx01
Posting Freak
870
03-06-2016, 03:28 AM
#16
Embrace the approach. Experiment until it functions...
J
Jerryx01
03-06-2016, 03:28 AM #16

Embrace the approach. Experiment until it functions...

N
NerdyOwls13
Member
59
03-06-2016, 05:02 AM
#17
The output doesn't match the pattern you provided. It seems like the information was altered or misrepresented. Let me know how I can help clarify this for you.
N
NerdyOwls13
03-06-2016, 05:02 AM #17

The output doesn't match the pattern you provided. It seems like the information was altered or misrepresented. Let me know how I can help clarify this for you.

M
marmonar
Member
82
03-12-2016, 11:59 AM
#18
Is this true about Apache? I’m really concerned about it. I need to focus more on Linux. BSD is confusing me...
M
marmonar
03-12-2016, 11:59 AM #18

Is this true about Apache? I’m really concerned about it. I need to focus more on Linux. BSD is confusing me...

T
TheFallenRose
Senior Member
616
03-23-2016, 01:43 AM
#19
I changed the order: $ sudo ln -s images ~/images And it functioned that time, though it didn’t behave as I anticipated. I’m puzzled about my expectations, but I assumed a redirect would appear like on Wikipedia. You rarely see the redirect page; it simply sends you straight to the destination. For example, going to ~/images would take me to /mnt/server/images, which is just a symlink pointing there. It acts like a mount without using mount. I didn’t realize that would work that way. Now I understand it’s only creating a link inside ~/images. Essentially a shortcut, similar to what you see in Windows. Sorry if I wasted your time. At least I gained some insight. For my scenario, I can now point Apache to store images in ~/images/images, which will correctly reach /mnt/server/images. I used to think directing it to ~/images would suffice because of the symlink, but that’s not how it works. The permissions on /mnt/server/images prevent me from changing them from 755 since it’s a Windows Server folder (probably 644). Apache can’t modify it that way.
T
TheFallenRose
03-23-2016, 01:43 AM #19

I changed the order: $ sudo ln -s images ~/images And it functioned that time, though it didn’t behave as I anticipated. I’m puzzled about my expectations, but I assumed a redirect would appear like on Wikipedia. You rarely see the redirect page; it simply sends you straight to the destination. For example, going to ~/images would take me to /mnt/server/images, which is just a symlink pointing there. It acts like a mount without using mount. I didn’t realize that would work that way. Now I understand it’s only creating a link inside ~/images. Essentially a shortcut, similar to what you see in Windows. Sorry if I wasted your time. At least I gained some insight. For my scenario, I can now point Apache to store images in ~/images/images, which will correctly reach /mnt/server/images. I used to think directing it to ~/images would suffice because of the symlink, but that’s not how it works. The permissions on /mnt/server/images prevent me from changing them from 755 since it’s a Windows Server folder (probably 644). Apache can’t modify it that way.

Pages (2): Previous 1 2