TC doesn't allow to make shortcut of a directory in its subdirectory

[AntonyD]

2Hacker
Do we somehow translate this text you quoted into our native languages of communication in different ways?
Because I see in it only the ABSENCE of at least some mention of problems with processing of .LNK files!
This is absolutely not what is written in this text.

[Hacker]

AntonyD,
Well, you are right, it depends on if .lnk files to folders were affected by the above mentioned history.txt fixes or not.

Roman

[MVV]

Not sure how serious you are

I really want to know what kind of software uses LNK files for enumerating subfolders, because it seems that TC doesn't allow creation of an absolutely legal LNK file only because of such a software.

The Tc will never forbid creating a file and moving it where it is desired. So, not a bug and no need to change anythng at this point.

In this case TC really doesn't allow me to create a file. And the error description (mentioned in the first post) is wrong.

[gpant]

27.02.19 Release Total Commander 9.22 release candidate 1 (32/64)
01.10.18 Fixed: Function to check file system links (junctions, reparse points) for infinite loops didn't handle relative paths created e.g. via "mklink /D MyDirLink ..\MyDir" while in directory "C:\MyDir" (32/64)

07.04.09 Release Total Commander 7.50 Beta 17
03.04.09 Fixed: NTFS file system: Do not follow symlinks which point to themselves or a parent dir of the current dir in "calculate occupied space", copy/move, search, and synchronize dirs (avoids infinite loops)

Roman

The documentation you refer to, is about soft and hard links in the FS level, a file with the LNK extension is a file that contains metadata for a UNC, if software is parsing it and making assumptions on its contents (or even worse treating it as an actual symlink!) its an issue with that specific application not the OS or TC. Saying that, I don't mind the limitation in TC, I don't really use lnk files .

[ghisler(Author)]

Moderator message

Moved to will not be changed

[AntonyD]

2ghisler(Author)
You did not explain WHY you did so. As we all here explained to you that the essence of the .LNK file is COMPLETELY differs from the any kind on links (sym/hard) - in this case you do NOT have any pros objections in order to leave this bug intact\unchanged.

[JOUBE]

leave this bug

Not a bug, a decision...

[AntonyD]

If you look from the perspective of the meanings and facts that we have reported here and what I was guided by when I decided to support this topic, then this long-standing “decision” should now be considered only as a bug. That's why I wrote it right away.

[ghisler(Author)]

I did explain it in this post:
viewtopic.php?p=446775#p446775

The problem is that I decided this many years (decades?) ago and don't remember why. Enabling it now would only ask for trouble.

[AntonyD]

many years (decades?) ago and don't remember why.

Taking into account the specified period of time and complete forgetting of the fact - on the basis of what program or something else this modification was made in the code - at the current moment of time we can definitely enable full support of this file extension. At least under some sort of flag, if it bothers you so much.
Because at the current moment in time it's impossible to find ANY REAL example of that - that it would suddenly break something...

[AntonyD]

Indicative silence....