11
2
When creating a shortcut in windows it makes a .lnk file.
I have researched and it seems these are openable in linux(with some tweaking). Does Linux have an equivalent? If so, whats the extension?
sealz
Posted 2011-07-14T14:29:29.023
Reputation: 2 034
15
Linux doesn't work with file extensions. However, you can make a shortcut on Linux using "symbolic links". They are something like a "pointer" to a file.
Take a look at here to see how to do it:
How do I create a symbolic link?
ln -s [TARGET DIRECTORY OR FILE] ./[SHORTCUT]For example:
ln -s /usr/local/apache/logs ./logs
Diogo
Posted 2011-07-14T14:29:29.023
Reputation: 28 202
26
Linux has two types of links:
.desktop files: created by graphical file managers. They are similar to Windows .lnk shortcuts, minus the automatic updating. They, like shortcuts, only work inside the GUI file manager program.
Symbolic links: created with ln -s target link on Linux and mklink link target on Windows. These can be used transparently by any program.
user1686
Posted 2011-07-14T14:29:29.023
Reputation: 283 655
4Oh, the superiority of Posix-based systems! – Roy Tinker – 2011-07-14T17:18:53.827
@Roy: There's always Plan9. – user1686 – 2011-07-14T17:49:26.590
That looks interesting, @grawity. I'll check it out. Thanks! – Roy Tinker – 2011-07-14T17:57:04.397
3there is the third one, hard link – Lie Ryan – 2011-07-14T18:41:28.360
@Lie: Yes, but it's not very widely used as a .lnk alternative due to the limitations. – user1686 – 2011-07-14T19:12:49.170
@FactorMystic If you make the symlink point to an absolute location in the filesystem, this is not the case.
ln -s /usr/local/apache/logs ./logswill make a symlink to/usr/local/apache/logs, and will not be broken when you move it around. – djhaskin987 – 2016-01-06T21:40:58.687The environment maintains the symbolic links in the path, but Windows changes the environment's path for shortcuts. (E.g., if a link targets
/tmpand resides in the file/home/user/temp, a symbolic link would access the directory/tmp/uploadas/home/user/temp/upload, whereas a shortcut would first change the environment directory to/tmpand then access/tmp/uploaddirectly.) I don't know of any Linux feature that behaves this way. – palswim – 2016-10-01T23:18:53.470@FactorMystic If you move the target of a shortcut, then it will always break. If you move the link (symlink or shortcut), it may break, and this depends on a number of factors. More just the link: symlink with absolute path and shortcut will be fine; symlink with relative path will break. Move link and target together (i.e. whose sub-tree) symlink with absolute path and shortcut will break, symlink with relative path will be fine. [so the comparison is not between symlink and shortcut, but between relative and absolute path.] – ctrl-alt-delor – 2016-10-20T18:38:38.687
4However, unlike a Windows shortcut, a symbolic link will break when the target file is moved... which is pretty much the principal reason you'd use a shortcut. So strictly speaking a linux symlink is not the equivalent of a Windows shortcut, it's the equivalent of a Windows symlink. – Factor Mystic – 2011-07-14T19:45:38.750
2Symlinks are my favorite tool for keeping my files organized. Linux symlinks are kept in sync with the target file no matter what program reads them! – Nathan Moos – 2011-07-15T00:09:11.023