![]() |
![]() | ![]() | ![]() | ![]() | ![]() | ![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
|
Welcome to Vista Forums we are your forum to discuss Windows Vista x64 and x86 systems. Whether you need help or just want to post an idea you have on Vista, this is the forum for you.
br> br> |
| |||||||
![]() |
| | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
| | #1 (permalink) |
| Guest | on NTFS junction points I have a strong feeling that the way junctions are being treated in NTFS needs to be revised. The issue I see is that, once I have created a junction from, say C:\FolderTarget pointing to D:\FolderSource, if I check permissions on C:\FolderTarget, I will see the permissions of that folder, NOT the ones of D:\FolderSource. Worse, if I change permission for C:\FolderTarget, none of these changes will be propagated to subfolders/files in D:\FolderSource. So, let's say I decide that I want to move my Public folders in Vista to a separate partition. No problem, I move the files over, and create a junction in C:\Users\Public pointing to the new location. HOWEVER, now Public Folder Sharing will not work anymore (not from the Network and Sharing Center, anyway): If I turn Public Folder Sharing on, then Vista will change permissions for C:\Users\Public accordingly, but since this has no effect on the permissions of the files at my new location, network users will not be granted access to any of the files. The only way to give users access to these files is to change file and sharing permissions of the source folder manually. I think what should be done is this: When I create a junction, the system should check if the source and target folders have identicakl permissions. If not, it should offer me to change permissions on either the source or the target folder so that they are identical. Then, if I change permissions on the target folder, permissions on the source folder should be changed in lockstep. Anybody with me on this one? Anybody care? ;-) ---------------- This post is a suggestion for Microsoft, and Microsoft responds to the suggestions with the most votes. To vote for this suggestion, click the "I Agree" button in the message pane. If you do not see the button, follow this link to open the suggestion in the Microsoft Web-based Newsreader and then click "I Agree" in the message pane. http://windowshelp.microsoft.com/com...unts_passwords |
My System Specs![]() |
| | #2 (permalink) | ||||||||||||
| Guest | RE: on NTFS junction points John, those are interesting suggestions. Keep in mind that junction points are a pretty advanced feature of Windows, and people who use them probably aren't using the Network and Sharing Center to set up their network... (except you ).Keeping the permissions of FolderTarget and FolderSource in sync is actually a hard problem. What happens if the pointer is offline (e.g., disk isn't mounted) when the target's permissions are changed? When does the pointer's permissions get updated? What if there are (say) 300 pointers to one target, and you want to keep them all in sync -- where is the list of pointers stored? (If the answer is "at the destination", then the destination can't be read-only). UNIX and friends solve this problem by simply ignoring the permissions on the pointer -- all permission-checking is done at the destination. I don't know enough about NTFS to say why junction points are implemented with separate ACLs for the pointer and destination. "John Myers" wrote:
| ||||||||||||
My System Specs![]() | |||||||||||||
| | #3 (permalink) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Guest | RE: on NTFS junction points > John, those are interesting suggestions. Keep in mind that junction points
(I have worked in that field for quite a while), so I don't, hmm, always agree with the canned choices that something like Network and Sharing Center gives me...
junction is first created: Ask the user what he wants to do on reconnect, and propagate the changes at that time, if so desired. Like you say, not too many people will use junctions anyway, and those that do should be able to figure out how to respond to such a prompt.
am in the same boat as you with respect to why things are done the way they are done in NTFS. Nevertheless, I think this is a topic that somebody needs to think about at Microsoft at some point, now that Vista actually does use these advanced file system constructs (that have existed in NTFS for many years, of course). One of the reasons I have stumbled over this is that on my own machines, I have set up the OS using separate partitions for C:\Users & C:\ProgramData, C:\Users\Public, and C:\Program Files, all implemented via junctions. That setup makes a lot of sense for a number of reasons, but it does cause issues because of Vista's incomplete awareness of junctions and other filesystem constructs. For example, certain Windows updates create hardlinks between files in subfolders of C:\Windows\WinSxS and files in C:\Program Files. Needless to say, that doesn't go over well on my system, forcing me to manually check the Pending.xml file for each update, and make appropriate changes if necessary. SP1 is going to be interesting... Anyway, thanks for your feedback! If you have any way to pass this on to the people in charge of NTFS development, that would be great, too! | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
My System Specs![]() | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| | #4 (permalink) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Guest | RE: on NTFS junction points > One
aren't you?
than I do... I don't know anyone working on NTFS. ![]() | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
My System Specs![]() | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |
Similar Threads | ||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Need to restore junction points | David Deley | Vista file management | 1 | 08-18-2008 10:51 PM |
| help with junction points | evenlater | Vista General | 1 | 04-29-2008 06:47 AM |
| Junction Points | Dzomlija | Vista file management | 6 | 03-25-2008 12:44 PM |
| Junction points and symbolic links | Dave | Vista General | 0 | 11-03-2007 06:40 AM |
| junction points | SamA | Vista account administration | 1 | 09-22-2007 08:24 AM |