0981: "Porn Folder"

[engr]

Desktop - My Computer - C - Windows - Desktop - My Computer - C - .....
At least that's how it was on Windows 98, I think.

[cream wobbly]

Most kind of searching commands avoid this by not following symlinks by default.

Yeah. Today's comic is about hard links. Symlinks are not this.

[cream wobbly]

Desktop - My Computer - C - Windows - Desktop - My Computer - C - .....
At least that's how it was on Windows 98, I think.

Likely. But inserting non-files into a filesystem is a strange and unique concept -- a hack. Hard linking, by comparison, is logical, and fits the filesystem model.

[cream wobbly]

So the guy is enough of a Unix geek to want to create a hard-linked directory loop - but both characters refer to directories as "folders"?

("folder" may actually be a better abstraction than "directory" to describe a point in a directory hierarchy - but I always thought of it as a Windows-ism.)

The presence of hardlinked directories should be a sufficient clue as to what OS they're using.

[Tobu]

I'm pretty sure most filesystem implementations are vulnerable to malicious on-disk structures; a directory loop would be an easy denial of service at the least.

[ARandomDude]

Relevant:
http://xkcd.com/714/

[rhomboidal]

The actual porn is in "calendar/backthatassup"

[perakojot]

inserting non-files into a filesystem is a strange and unique concept -- a hack.

/dev/*
/proc/*
/sys/*

[Exüberance]

Desktop - My Computer - C - Windows - Desktop - My Computer - C - .....
At least that's how it was on Windows 98, I think.

Wasn't that just a shortcut (ie, not a symlink, just a think that makes Windows Explorer go to a different place) though?

[project2051]

I keep my porn on the desktop.. I can't waste time clicking through folders to get to it.

[gormster]

Shouldn't that be... Folder Porn? (Puts on sunglasses)

thatsthejoke.jpg

[Menacing Spike]

inserting non-files into a filesystem is a strange and unique concept -- a hack.

/dev/*
/proc/*
/sys/*

Pagefile.sys

[cjmcjmcjmcjm]

I keep my porn on the desktop.. I can't waste time clicking through folders to get to it.

I keep mine in folders, depending on subject type

[hrasdt]

I keep my porn on the desktop.. I can't waste time clicking through folders to get to it.

I keep mine in folders, depending on subject type

Only wimps use tape backup: real men just upload their important stuff on ftp, and let the rest of the world mirror it

Relevant.

[RebeccaRGB]

("folder" may actually be a better abstraction than "directory" to describe a point in a directory hierarchy - but I always thought of it as a Windows-ism.)

It was a Macintosh-ism long before (over 10 years before) it was a Windows-ism. (Or, if you want to get pedantic, it's technically a Lisa-ism or maybe even a Xerox-ism.)

[ijuin]

This is why there needs to be a Time To Live variable set for diving into directory trees, like the Time To Live for network hops, and for the same reason--to prevent loops.

[StClair]

I wouldn't call it a perversion, but I prefer to use hard links whenever possible (and get cranky when programs and/or OSes insist on "helping" me by hiding them behind libraries, "My ____", etc etc). I have a preferred set of directories ("Text", "Images", "Sounds", etc) that I've migrated from system to system over the last twenty years or so. I want to know where my files actually are.

(Of course, on some level I'm aware that they're just infinitesimal bits of iron oxide on a hard-disk platter... but there are necessary and unnecessary levels of abstraction, and I cling to the belief that most symbolic links are the latter.)

[idisjunction]

I'm not sure about other shells. I'm actually kind of surprised that * doesn't escape - characters when it expands. Would be a pretty easy fix I would think

EDIT: Trying to delete the "-r" file doesn't work even when wrapped in single quotes. o.O Wuuhhhhh? I can delete it graphically through nautilus though. Weird.
Maybe * DOES escape the character properly, but rm for some reason interprets it as a flag? Most peculiar

To a program -r '-r' and "-r" are all the same, no matter what you use the program gets the string '-r' there is no concept of named arguments in the shell, only a list of strings to pass to a program, so the program is the one that handles the parsing of arguments. Hence since it gets -r any amount of shell level escaping is futile.

You can use -- to separate args from filenames when using rm, so `rm -- '-r'` will delete the file "-r".

You can also do rm -r ./-r

[The Moomin]

Filesystem porn is so up itself.

Or is this some sort of computer centipede?

[jalohones]

Nah, it's no good. No matter how deeply I try to nest my file system, it always somehow ends up linking to the Wikipedia entry for Philosophy.

[Jeyekomon]

I saw mainly some Linux-related discussion here, so.. Any ideas how to create that directory loop in windows?
Of course it will be difficult imo, but.. Is that even possible?

[idisjunction]

I saw mainly some Linux-related discussion here, so.. Any ideas how to create that directory loop in windows?
Of course it will be difficult imo, but.. Is that even possible?

I think hard links can only be done with files on Windows. Softlinks are possible, but the software to create them is not included by default, at least in Windows XP.

Relevant external links:

http://paranoid-engineering.blogspot.com/2009/04/symbolic-links-in-windows.html
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/aa363878%28v=vs.85%29.aspx
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/aa365006%28v=vs.85%29.aspx

[Jeyekomon]

Relevant external links:

Ha, that looks interesting! Thanks.

[Ken_g6]

I actually made a hardlinked directory loop on WinXP just now, using something called NTFS Link. I made the path "C:\recursive\folder\is", then linked "recursive" into "is". (And renamed "Link to recursive" to "recursive".)

It works up to "C:\recursive\folder\is\recursive\folder\is\recursive\folder\is\recursive\folder\is\recursive\folder\is\recursive\folder\is\recursive\folder\is\recursive\folder\is\recursive\folder\is\recursive\folder\is\recursive\folder\is\recursive\folder\is\recursive" but then it pops up a dialog when I try to get into "folder": "Can't access this folder. Path is too long."

Edit: The last screen when I type "dir /s" from "recursive":

Code: Select all

 Directory of C:\recursive\folder\is\recursive\folder\is\recursive\folder\is\rec
ursive\folder\is\recursive\folder\is\recursive\folder\is\recursive\folder\is\rec
ursive\folder\is\recursive\folder\is\recursive\folder\is\recursive\folder\is\rec
ursive\folder\is

11/25/2011  02:36 PM    <DIR>          .
11/25/2011  02:36 PM    <DIR>          ..
11/25/2011  02:36 PM    <JUNCTION>     recursive
               0 File(s)              0 bytes

 Directory of C:\recursive\folder\is\recursive\folder\is\recursive\folder\is\rec
ursive\folder\is\recursive\folder\is\recursive\folder\is\recursive\folder\is\rec
ursive\folder\is\recursive\folder\is\recursive\folder\is\recursive\folder\is\rec
ursive\folder\is\recursive

11/25/2011  02:36 PM    <DIR>          .
11/25/2011  02:36 PM    <DIR>          ..
11/25/2011  02:36 PM    <DIR>          folder
               0 File(s)              0 bytes

     Total Files Listed:
               0 File(s)              0 bytes
             111 Dir(s)   5,995,327,488 bytes free

C:\recursive>

[ormaaj]

Yes, on Windows there are hardlinks, symlinks, and shortcuts - 3 different categories. I'm sure most people are unaware of anything but shortcuts as IIRC you can't create them using the file explorer.

[Mrkva]

Patch for Linux 3.1.2 (works at least on ext4). But be careful with that

Code: Select all

--- fs/namei.c.bak   2011-11-26 18:41:08.000000000 +0100
+++ fs/namei.c   2011-11-26 18:43:40.000000000 +0100
@@ -2908,8 +2908,6 @@
       return -EPERM;
    if (!dir->i_op->link)
       return -EPERM;
-   if (S_ISDIR(inode->i_mode))
-      return -EPERM;
 
    error = security_inode_link(old_dentry, dir, new_dentry);
    if (error)


[Kartoffelkopf]

As a mechanophile, this thread, erm, intrigues me.

[Copper Bezel]

Yes, on Windows there are hardlinks, symlinks, and shortcuts - 3 different categories. I'm sure most people are unaware of anything but shortcuts as IIRC you can't create them using the file explorer.

Well, the same would be true on any particular Linux system, since things like .desktop files are equivalent to Windows "Shortcuts." Some file managers provide a graphical method for making symlinks, but not all.

(Of course, on some level I'm aware that they're just infinitesimal bits of iron oxide on a hard-disk platter... but there are necessary and unnecessary levels of abstraction, and I cling to the belief that most symbolic links are the latter.)

Just so long as you understand that the folder structure doesn't in any way reflect the organization of said bits. = ) Personally, I don't see the difference between hard links and symlinks in this respect, although a hierarchical filesystem would be a fairly nice solution. = )

inserting non-files into a filesystem is a strange and unique concept -- a hack.

/dev/*
/proc/*
/sys/*

Bit of a tautology in this instance, but the conceit is that "everything is a file," no?

Edit: Meant non-hierarchical. Dammit.

[balthasar_s]

Desktop - My Computer - C - Windows - Desktop - My Computer - C - .....
At least that's how it was on Windows 98, I think.

There is no "My Computer" in c:\windows\desktop in Windows 98.

[incircuitous]

Somehow I was expecting the comic to contain a reference to Oak Island, Nova Scotia.

[dbosst]

I don't know how many people know about ADS. but I suppose even fewer know about Junctions since windows XP doesn't come shipped with a tool to make them ...

Code: Select all

12/17/2011  03:55 AM    <JUNCTION>     here

Spoiler:

The surprising bit is the command prompt properly shows it as a Junction; in the list view in Windows Explorer, you'll see it as "File Folder", however, if you click on the properties for the parent folder of the junction, it will reflect the correct number of real folders under the "Contains:" section (although there is no mention of junctions).

Folder porn (nix & windows) was popular in the 1990s among public ftp sites that were "re-purposed" by the anons & pirates of those days.

I suppose that's the source of nostalgia with this comic.

[AUS]

Sorry for the necrobump, but does anyone have any idea how to do this on Windows 7?

[j_kubik]

Patch for Linux 3.1.2 (works at least on ext4). But be careful with that

Code: Select all

--- fs/namei.c.bak   2011-11-26 18:41:08.000000000 +0100
+++ fs/namei.c   2011-11-26 18:43:40.000000000 +0100
@@ -2908,8 +2908,6 @@
       return -EPERM;
    if (!dir->i_op->link)
       return -EPERM;
-   if (S_ISDIR(inode->i_mode))
-      return -EPERM;
 
    error = security_inode_link(old_dentry, dir, new_dentry);
    if (error)


You should also modify ln command (or whatever tool you are using) too. Most tools are making several checks independenly from checks in kernel because these only return quite generic -EPERM error code; -EPERM can mean multiple things, and user usually wants more elaborate info on what went wrong.

I am too lazy to post relevant path to ln command - if you are old enough to play with those things, you should have no problems finding it on your own.

In case you do it to your system, a small hint: do not replace your system ln command, but copy compiled executable to /usr/bin/ manually under changed name like ln.all. Some badly written scripts (eg. using ln's error code as directory-detector while hardlinking directory tree) might make your filesystem a link-jungle, so it's best not give them more than they expect to get.