Hello Friends
I had built a library on Linux.
Now i want to copy the lib folder containing symbolic links to windows.
but when i copied those to windows each link is getting exactly the same memory as the original one.
For Example:
On Linux
lrwxrwxrwx 1 msingh named 18 Mar 14 16:58 libicudata.so -> libicudata.so.
36.0
lrwxrwxrwx 1 msingh named 18 Mar 14 16:58 libicudata.so.36 -> libicudata.
so.36.0
-rw-r--r-- 1 msingh named 10153924 Mar 14 16:58 libicudata.so.36.0

On Windows
-rwx------+ 1 msingh ???????? 10153924 Mar 14 16:58 libicudata.so
-rwx------+ 1 msingh ???????? 10153924 Mar 14 16:58 libicudata.so.36
-rwx------+ 1 msingh ???????? 10153924 Mar 14 16:58 libicudata.so.36.0

How can i rectify this problem.

symbolic links don't exist on windows. not possible.

sorry about the problems you seem to have had posting. our spam software seems to be running amok...

Hii
Yes I am aware of the fact that symbolic links doesn't exist on windows.
But there should be some way to copy it to windows or some alternative for it.
Because i need to have those links on windows

well that is the alternative, a copy of the original file..

I am unclear on the objective here....
Do you want a link to a file on a Linux partition? If Windows is not set up to read the Linux partition, then I'm not sure how a link would be useful.
Please describe the setup you want to have and what you want to be able to do.

Side comment: What is a Windows shortcut--is it not a form of symbolic link?

Actually I have to distribute these libraries which i have built on linux as third party.

So i need to copy these links to windows but there they are not behaving as links.

I had built icu library(IBM) on all platforms like WINNT,WIN8664,LX8664,LX86,AIX etc.

Now i need the lib folders of all of them in windows to distribute them.

Thanks

tar 'em, then gzip 'em. When you do this, I *think* the links will go along.

I'm still not getting it. Is this a set of folder and files with internal links? More generally, why are the links necessary?

And why not distribute them from Linux?

well i guess it's just that symlinks between objects exist under linux and that needs to be preserved... but yeah as above, tar it up of whatever. i was getting the impression this was some sort of port attempt...

and yeah a symlink is *like* a shotrcut, but i think a shortcut is just a real file that windows interprets based on crude file extensions and such. you can't (i don't think) actually "run" a shortcut like you could a symlink. you can double click it to fire an app up, but that's not the same.

I think that shortcutting to library won't work in Windows. When you try to access it, you'll access the shortcut file not the library.

Symlinks are a lot more versatile than shortcuts. Actually, symlinks are the biggest thing that sets *nix apart from windows, when considered from a functional standpoint. There is no equivalent of a symlink in Windows.

Shortcuts are substantially similar to KDE desktop icons, in that you can indeed run a program from a shortcut, or open a file (which is merely running a program, when you get down to it). Shortcuts have all the limitations of a KDE desktop icon - which makes sense because the purpose is similar.

Check that!

If you run an interent search for "Windows symbolic links" you will find quite a lot of sites stating that symbolic links do exist on Windows, and even how to use them.

Well, you learn something new every day!

Actually having read through a couple of these articles, I think it would be more appropriate to say that Microsoft has built a basic capability to support symbolic and hard links into NTFS, but has not built that capability out. However some enterprising developers have taken advantage of the filesystem capability to build their own third-party tools to manage links.

The upshot is that you apparently can have symlinks with Windows, but with significant restrictions, cross-utility incompatibility, and a certain amount of peril.

Better than nothing, I suppose. Maybe.

http://shell-shocked.org/article.php?id=284

There are a lot of things which were supposed to be but weren't fully finished. I have read in some asm forum about projects to disasm ntoskrnl.exe and other libs, patch them and make faster (poster mentioned that increase in some functions was around 50% (it was clearly seen in his 64 bit system)).