Skip to main content
Super User

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

28
  • 25
    Just to be clear: there may well be other subtler functional differences between directory junctions and directory symbolic links. The remote vs. local thing is just the most obvious from a user (as opposed to a developer) perspective.
    – Harry Johnston
    Commented Oct 5, 2011 at 4:02
  • 18
    @MatthewSteeples do you mean that if I create a symbolic link C:\testlink (which points to C:\test on my computer) and someone remote access my computer and clicks on C:\testlink, it would resolve to the C:\test on HIS computer, Whereas if I create a directory junction C:\testlink (which points to C:\test on my computer), and someone remote access my computer and clicks on C:\testlink) it would lead him to the C:\test on my computer? Or did I get it the wrong way round?
    – Pacerier
    Commented Oct 5, 2011 at 8:19
  • 12
    @Pacerier in this context yes, but symbolic links allow you to have a folder on your computer that points to a network share (because they're resolved client side). Eg C:\MyNetworkShare could actually point to \\Alice\Share
    – Matthew Steeples
    Commented Oct 6, 2011 at 14:57
  • 10
    @MatthewSteeples but couldn't we create a directory junction C:\MyNetworkShare which points to \\Alice\Share as well?
    – Pacerier
    Commented Oct 7, 2011 at 10:44
  • 14
    @Pacerier, no, junction points have to be local.
    – Harry Johnston
    Commented Oct 8, 2011 at 0:05