Find Files enhancement

[wanderer]

Would be nice to have a way to exclude junctions from the search...

[petermad]

IgnoreLinks=0 Allows you to ignore hard links (junctions, reparse points) to directories in various functions. Note: The function "Synchronize dirs" uses a separate option "SyncIgnoreJunctions".
Sum of:
1: copy/move/calculate occupied space
2: internal packers (zip, tar)
4: branch view
8: find files (except when using Everything), re-scan tree
16: ignore links even when they are selected in the current directory. Otherwise only links in selected subdirectories are ignored.

[wanderer]

2petermad

Hey, thanks but that's permanent. I was talking about a checkbox to be able to set it on-demand.

[petermad]

2wanderer
Yes, that could be nice++ - it would be even nicer if the TC-setting could also set 'Everything' to not follow junctions...

[Horst.Epp]

2wanderer
Yes, that could be nice++ - it would be even nicer if the TC-setting could also set 'Everything' to not follow junctions...

Everything doesn't follow folder junctions by default with NTFS indexing.

[NotNull]

IgnoreLinks=0 Allows you to ignore hard links (junctions, reparse points) to directories in various functions.

This Help text needs some serious fixing....

• There is nothing to "follow" in hard links. It is just another pointer to the same "inode" ( ~ another path to the same file)
• Folders can't have hard links
• junctions, reparse points are not a manifestation of hard links
• A junction *is* a reparse point
• Missing here is another form of reparse points: (Directory) symbolic links.

[Vasilich]

@NotNull
1. in quoted help text there is no any entry for word "follow". Have you mixed it with Peter's answer?
2. Folders can have junctions. I assume you want to propose to use "soft links (symbolic links and junctions)" instead of "hard links (junctions, reparse points)" ?
3. see 2
4. see 2
5. see 2

[NotNull]

1. in quoted help text there is no any entry for word "follow". Have you mixed it with Peter's answer?

No. That is just the common expression when talking about links: You follow a link (to get to the target of that link)

2. Folders can have junctions.

Never said they couldn't. Even stronger: ONLY folders can have junctions.
(which technically speaking is incorrect; don't want to complicate things even further)

I assume you want to propose to use "soft links (symbolic links and junctions)" instead of "hard links (junctions, reparse points)" ?

The only thing I proposed is to fix the current description as It is wrong on too many levels. How that is done is not up to me.



I have no idea what you want to tell me/us with point 3,4 and 5?

[Vasilich]

i just want you to propose the proper text instead of just pointing to mistakes. Or to take my proposal

[NotNull]

I can't. I have no idea what the IgnoreLinks setting actually does. Or should do.