Vista - Should New-Item consistently create needed path elements?

New-Item is inconsistent in whether it will create necessary parent
containers if some containers in a path do not exist.

For example, suppose there is no FSO folder on drive C. Trying to create a
file within C:\FSO fails, but trying to create a directory within C:\FSO
succeeds - the parent and the child folders are both created.

With the registry provider, path elements must be created one by one; even
if there was a reason for the filesystem behavior, I would expect registry
key creation (which is directly analogous to filesystem directory creation)
would work.

Bug this, or is there a reason for the different behavior across providers
and itemtypes?

> With the registry provider, path elements must be created one by one

Just to say that you can do that in one line with "-force" parameter.

I note now that "-force" switch seems to work for HKLM only if the
first path element already exists (here SOFTWARE):

new-item "hklm:\SOFTWARE\testreg\test1\test2\" -force

and always works for HKCU :

new-item "hkcu:\TEST\testreg\test1\test2\" -force


The need sounds like the "-recurse" parameter of "remove-item" for me.

Regards,

--
Jean - JMST
Belgium

I'd say bug it!
(still hating inconsistency...)

--
greetings
dreeschkind

"Alex K. Angelopoulos [MVP]" wrote:

> New-Item is inconsistent in whether it will create necessary parent
> containers if some containers in a path do not exist.
>
> For example, suppose there is no FSO folder on drive C. Trying to create a
> file within C:\FSO fails, but trying to create a directory within C:\FSO
> succeeds - the parent and the child folders are both created.
>
> With the registry provider, path elements must be created one by one; even
> if there was a reason for the filesystem behavior, I would expect registry
> key creation (which is directly analogous to filesystem directory creation)
> would work.
>
> Bug this, or is there a reason for the different behavior across providers
> and itemtypes?
>
>
>

Bugged here. I added a comment about possibly controlling this with
a -Recurse parameter.

https://connect.microsoft.com/feedba...5314&SiteID=99

"dreeschkind" <dreeschkind@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:C1FB5829-B6DD-497C-A0F3-D825A7C339AC@microsoft.com...
> I'd say bug it!
> (still hating inconsistency...)
>
> --
> greetings
> dreeschkind
>
> "Alex K. Angelopoulos [MVP]" wrote:
>
>> New-Item is inconsistent in whether it will create necessary parent
>> containers if some containers in a path do not exist.
>>
>> For example, suppose there is no FSO folder on drive C. Trying to create
>> a
>> file within C:\FSO fails, but trying to create a directory within C:\FSO
>> succeeds - the parent and the child folders are both created.
>>
>> With the registry provider, path elements must be created one by one;
>> even
>> if there was a reason for the filesystem behavior, I would expect
>> registry
>> key creation (which is directly analogous to filesystem directory
>> creation)
>> would work.
>>
>> Bug this, or is there a reason for the different behavior across
>> providers
>> and itemtypes?
>>
>>
>>