Linking directory

[stevegray]

I have HP-UX 11.0.

I want /data/WFS linked to a larger file system called /data1/WFS.

When I create a link:
ln -s /data1/WFS /data/WFS
it does not apear to work.

It looks like:
lrwxrwxr-x 1 titan titan 10 Mar 3 03:45 WFS -> /data1/WFS

But when I do a >test it stays in /data/WFS instead of going to /data1/WFS.

What am I doing wrong or not understanding?

[Mark Grant]

How do you know it is still in /data/WFS? Most commands that will look in /data/WFS will actually follow the symbolic link and even "pwd" will lie to you.

If you do "cd /data1/WFS" and then "ls" is your file there?

If so, then everything is working.

[Dennis Handly]

>Mark: even pwd will lie to you.

If you want to keep pwd(1) honest, you need to use "pwd -P".

>If you do "cd /data1/WFS" and then "ls" is your file there?

Right, or do: bdf .

[stevegray]

I am in /data/WFS. I do a >test.
The file test shows up in /data/WFS and not in /data1/WFS/test.

Their is a sub-directory under /data1/WFS called in. This is the directory where users put their data.

This is how I did the setup:
mv /data/WFS /data1/WFS
This moved everything to the new directory. It removed the sub-directory in /data/WFS. It is /data1/WFS.

The link command I ran is:
ln -s /data1/WFS/ data/WFS

[stevegray]

SOrry I cannot type today. The link command was:
ln -s /data1/WFS /data/WFS

[Yogeeraj_1]

Hi,

can you post the output of the following command:
ll /data*

revert

kind regards
yogeeraj

[stevegray]

Here you go.

$ pwd
/data/WFS
$ ll /data/*
/data/RP: total 0
drwxrwxrwx 4 titan titan 96 Feb 2 15:36 2
/data/VS:
total 0
drwxrwxr-x 4 titan titan 96 Feb 2 15:32 2
drwxrwxr-x 4 titan titan 96 Feb 2 15:33 3
/data/WFS:
total 0
lrwxrwxr-x 1 titan titan 10 Mar 3 03:45 WFS -> /data1/WFS
drwxrwxr-x 2 titan titan 96 Mar 3 04:17 in
/data/lost+found:
total 0

[Dennis Handly · Accepted solution]

/data/WFS:
lrwxrwxr-x Mar 3 03:45 WFS -> /data1/WFS

This is your problem. You created WFS and then you put another WFS into WFS/.

So
$ rm /data/WFS/WFS
$ rmdir /data/WFS
$ ln -s /data1/WFS /data/WFS

>Sorry I cannot type today. The link command was: ln -s /data1/WFS /data/WFS

That's what you had??

[stevegray]

This looks better.

I was in /data/WFS
I did >test

It showed up in /data/WFS and in /data1/WFS

Why is it showing up in /data/WFS?
$ pwd
/data/WFS
$ ll /data* /data:
total 0
drwxrwxrwx 3 titan titan 96 Feb 2 15:36 RP
drwxrwxr-x 4 titan titan 96 Feb 2 15:33 VS
lrwxrwxr-x 1 titan titan 10 Mar 3 04:44 WFS -> /data1/WFS
drwxr-xr-x 2 titan titan 96 Jan 15 05:20 lost+found
/data1:
total 0
drwxrwxrwx 3 titan titan 96 Mar 3 04:47 WFS
drwxr-xr-x 2 titan titan 96 Feb 29 04:03 lost+found


$ ll /data*

/data:
total 0
drwxrwxrwx 3 titan titan 96 Feb 2 15:36 RP
drwxrwxr-x 4 titan titan 96 Feb 2 15:33 VS
lrwxrwxr-x 1 titan titan 10 Mar 3 04:44 WFS -> /data1/WFS
drwxr-xr-x 2 titan titan 96 Jan 15 05:20 lost+found

/data1:
total 0
drwxrwxrwx 3 titan titan 96 Mar 3 04:47 WFS
drwxr-xr-x 2 titan titan 96 Feb 29 04:03 lost+found
$ ll /data/*
lrwxrwxr-x 1 titan titan 10 Mar 3 04:44 /data/WFS -> /data1/WFS
/data/RP: total 0
drwxrwxrwx 4 titan titan 96 Feb 2 15:36 2
/data/VS: total 0
drwxrwxr-x 4 titan titan 96 Feb 2 15:32 2
drwxrwxr-x 4 titan titan 96 Feb 2 15:33 3 /data/lost+found: total 0

[Dennis Handly]

>Why is it showing up in /data/WFS?

It's a symlink, so it should be in "both".

>$ pwd

I told you to use "pwd -P" to prevent the shell from lying to you.

$ ll /data*
/data:
lrwxrwxr-x 1 10 WFS -> /data1/WFS
/data1:
drwxrwxrwx 3 96 WFS

This is working fine. You have a symlink /data/WFS that points to /data1/WFS/.

[stevegray]

Okay then.

Thanks to all for the help.

Points assigned.

[Mark Grant]

The reason that it is in both is because /data/WFS and /data1/WFS are now the same thing to all intent and purpose.

"cd /data/WFS" puts you in exactly the same place as "cd /data1/WFS"

Dennis: Good spot on the additional WFS by the way.

[Dennis Handly]

>Mark: Good spot on the additional WFS by the way.

That was my original assumption but Yogeeraj suggested the ll(1) first and that confirmed it.

But Steve's mv and ln shouldn't have done that.

>>Sorry I cannot type today.

>ME: That's what you had??

Ah, I see the bad one now.