Symbolic link support

[cvoges12]

Do we have a github issue tracking any of the two symlink implementations (with and without filesystem support)?

It would be nice to get this issue going into a more implementation phase eventually. Or fork and show case different implementations. I don’t think the “w/ fs support” will get any where without such. And if deemed to complex, we can still take the “w/o fs support” route.

[devnull]

@cvoges12
The thread is 6 years old.
If you want to achieve something, open a separate thread.

[cvoges12]

But last reply was made last year. Albeit over a long period of time, I feel like there’s some discussion still happening.

[tflidd]

@cvoges12

Do we have a github issue tracking any of the two symlink implementations (with and without filesystem support)?

It would be nice to get this issue going into a more implementation phase eventually. Or fork and show case different implementations. I don’t think the “w/ fs support” will get any where without such. And if deemed to complex, we can still take the “w/o fs support” route.

You’ll find related feature requests on the desktop bug tracker. If you can participate and add some code, they are very likely open for pull requests.

[wovetudi]

@tflidd

You’ll find related feature requests on the desktop bug tracker. If you can participate and add some code, they are very likely open for pull requests.

So others don’t need to search for it themselves, here’s the link:

Syncing symbolic links as reference

I understand that de-referencing symlinks could cause a lot of trouble (like loops) but simply syncing symlinks as-is should be really easy as long as client and server are both linux /mac / unix systems.

For Windows clients just continuing to ignore them would probably be the easiest solution.