There's an important misunderstanding in what symlinks do. Specifically, symlinks do not do this:
which would allow me a virtual copy that could be altered without changing the original.
[...]
My intention is to install an OS to one partition, make it read-only, and run the OS from a second partition which is simply a symlink to the read-only installation.
Even if you could boot across a symlink, it would not provide this "copy on write" feature.
Symlinks are nothing more than aliases to be used when following a path; e.g. you could place a symlink at C:\foo
which tells the OS "look at D:\bar
instead". That's it. Once the symlink is followed, all operations – whether reads or writes or deletions – will affect the original file equally.
(Hardlinks do even less. A "hard link" is literally just a file with two names (or more); for this reason, hardlinks cannot even cross a disk. And likewise, using any name will still alter the original file, without making a special copy. Only certain Linux filesystems support copy-on-write "reflinks".)
Instead, to have a read-only base, you could use one of the following:
Volume Shadow Copies are copy-on-write snapshots. The "System Restore" feature in Windows will allow restoring the OS to an old snapshot. (Unfortunately, there's no command to revert to a snapshot in full.)
There are third-party programs to "freeze / thaw" the OS, usually by using a special driver; they are popular in schools and libraries. They redirect all writes elsewhere so that you get a fresh OS after every reboot.
You can install the OS in a virtual machine; many VM software have support either for simple snapshots, or "differential disks", allowing you to revert the OS to an earlier state.
If you have two disks, just clone the whole thing – it doesn't take that long to copy ~20 GB of a Windows installation.
"Would this work?" - No – Ramhound – 2018-01-18T05:04:40.667