I mean I feel stupid typing it now, but Iāve been using Windows since I was 5 years old, and Linux for about 30 days. It was not apparent to me that many of my folders were actually shortcuts to stuff in my user directory, and now that I know to look out for them the location of my applications make sooo much more sense.
Wait until you learn about hard links
Donāt feel dumb! This is just normal learning!
Symlinks are possible in Windows (at least in NTFS filesystems) but to my knowledge they arenāt used by anything official.
Windowsās weird āpsuedo foldersā thing it does with āDocumentsā etc is something else entirely.
I think ntfs does some weird shit with translating names of files in different languages too, and maybe they are simlinks
Say desktop is translated to ntesctop in some language, the real file is still desktop but there is a link as ntesctop --> desktop so without changing the system it flips from one language to another. I am not sure, I havenāt really spent much time on it, in recent years I did some installations at work but never got to play with it much.
I donāt think that does an actual rewite point. A lot of the localisation features were done using file explorer. You can even ālocaliseā folders yourself using custom desktop.ini files. But those changes only showed in file explorer.
Now email! In exchange the standard folders such as inbox are localised, but donāt have a fixed alias. So if doing administration you need to know the language of a mailbox to know the name of say the Calendar folder, so you can update permissions.
There are some really old introductory unix texts of how the system is structured and why, 99% of this stuff is still true for most linux (except some weird experimental alternatives where people tried to create ms-unix ). The basic terminal commands should also be useful, and help you understand. For example open a terminal and see the command for copy (cp) or (mv) or mkdir rm rmdir and use -h for the help of the options of each (if -h doesnāt work then --help does) and then extensive documentation is found by name of command after āmanā for manual ex: man chmod
One of the most magical things that happens in unix is mount, where you create a directory (mount point /mnt), take a device like your usb stick volume named sdb1
mount /dev/sdb1 /mnt
ls -lah /mnt
say you create /tmp/disks and in it a b c d e and mount 5 disks in a through e and it appears as one subdirectory /tmp/disks
Instead of looking at a file browser and something going cling-clong and appearing as a volume, what dumb people do
protip: put bind -s 'set mark-symlinked-directories on' in your ~/.bashrc
and also bind -s 'set completion-ignore-case on' because why not :)
Hey no worries, we all start somewhere.
Now that you know about symlinks, you can get creative with them: https://sparkventure.net/the-versatility-of-symbolic-links-in-linux-a-guide-with-examples/
The hard part now is to avoid overdoing it: https://www.ceos3c.com/linux/understanding-linux-symbolic-links-a-beginners-guide/#best-practices-and-common-pitfalls
āOverdoing itā doesnāt exist when you understand what it can accomplish. Bedrock Linux for example is based on symlink abuse from what I understand
Iāll have to look into that distro later. Anything particularly noteworthy about it, besides the symlink abuse?
Edit: I did some rudimentary searching, apparently itās a meta distro that letās you mix and match stuff from multiple linux distros: https://bedrocklinux.org/
Thatās actually pretty wild. I might play around with this in the future
That beginners guide says to avoid creating circular symlinks. What if, entirely hypothetically, I already have a circular symlink?
I created a symlink to the directory the symlink is in. If I try and simply ādeleteā the symlink in a file browser it tells me that gigs of data will be deleted
