queue Darth Vader:
Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

Symbolic links are the closest thing there is (that I know of but I'm a nublet) and you don't want to use them so... maybe sometimes there isn't more than one way to skin a cat?

sounds like .dll's bastard cousin, and .dll's are one of the main weak points of windows.

Speaking for myself, I don't see a benefit in it. I can't stand it. The last thing I want is for files I put in one place to be forcibly linked to and put on display in some pseudolocation that looks like somewhere else.

For me, Linux is about control. It is not about contrived over-abstraction in the name of anticipating your vaguest wants and needs that may appeal to a few but just ends up pissing everybody else off. In Linux, if you want your computer to lie to you about the locations of files, then yes, you can certainly play with your mount points to the degree that in some ways it appears to be doing so. But thank god it does not do so by default.

Yes, exactly. Except I think I may be grumpier than you!

So what do you want? You find several features in the Linux world better than what Windows has to offer, and one feature Windows has that you like, and that one feature prevents you from switching. If that one feature is too important for you to give up, the solution is obvious.

Herein lies the problem. You want to change to a new system without having to learn too much. Forgive me if I am wrong, but when I see a statement like, I interpret it as code for, "Linux will meet my needs when it is just like Windows." I applaud your willingness to learn a little, as you mentioned your plan to research the suggestions you have been given, but some things require a good deal of learning. Simply put, Linux gives the user the power to do anything, but the more one wants to do, the more one must learn.

My intent is not to be harsh, but the post probably appears that way. I am not trying to be insulting, but merely to encourage you to consider altering the way you approach Linux a little.

Ok, I've had a look at krusader and it doesn't seem to provide external access to it's VFS.
Haven't looked at dolphin or nautilus.

While I was searching around I came across a script that used find to gather up files based on arbitrary criteria and created symlinks to those in a nominated dir.
Unfortunately, I can't find it again, but it shouldn't be too hard to do - might even be a one-liner
Also, if they were all on the same filesystem you could use hardlinks, which might have some advantages over symlinks.
This could be scheduled to run periodically, or called (and fed search criteria) as required.

GNU/Linux ftw!
Don't wait for some lazy/overworked developer.
Pick up the tools and make it do what you want.

Edit: not the same one I saw earlier but this gives the same idea.
http://debian.itags.org/wap_q_debian_76777

Part of writing gui utilties is the creativity to develop something truly unique and useful, and present it to the user in an intuitive way. Microsoft does this, but to a fault. It's like an operating system that wipes your butt and parallel parks your car.*

The Windows libraries functionality, as you've described it, sounds like a two-day programming project, because it's so fundamentally simplistic.

The scary thing is that you believe the objects in libraries are NOT symbolic links. They are exactly that. Windows just doesn't call them symbolic links. They refer to links as everything but symbolic links.

A shortcut is a symbolic link. The objects within a library are symbolic links and URLs behind icons. I guess no one ever thought to automate the process any more than it already is.

But I'm sure if you explained to the gnome3 project how it works and what you like about it, and requested something like it for gnome3, they'd give it to you. Programmers above all want to write programs that users want.

There is actually some discussion on the gnome3 mailing list of something akin to Windows 7 libraries functionality. I think it's a good idea, but it tends toward redundancy and clutter to make everything easier to find.

Linux actually has the largest installed base of any operating system. It runs on everything from networking switches and smart phones to IBM z-series mainframes to Cray Research supercomputers, networked clocks, PC desktops, Internet routers, servers of all types, Cisco equipment, embedded firewall appliances; And Google Android IS Linux.

Amazon Kindle runs Linux, as do almost all models of tablet computers. Debian Linux is the most popular operating system in the world. Linux has made the digital age possible.

Third world nations could not undergo industrial development without Linux, because they can't afford software-licensing fees.* Smart phones exist because of open-source software.

I don't know why no one seems to know that Mac OS is FreeBSD UNIX, another open-source project, without which Apple Computer would not even exist.

Linux is not only ubiquitous, but it's altruistic, leveling the playing field between capitalist-behemoth economies and the third-world's poverty-stricken poor.

Microsoft just says screw 'em. If they don't have the money they're worthless. Forget about them. The world is overpopulated as it is, and we needs to put sweat shops somewhere.

The Linux community adopts the standard of blindness to human differences, allowing absolutely anyone to contribute.

Ethnic origin, gender, religious convictions, sexual preference, personal background, employment, nation of residence, personal habits, tastes, beliefs, associations, political affiliations, personal causes, health, disability, marital status, language, and speech are utterly inconsequential to the Linux community, because Linux represents the only model of true human equality on earth's surface.

It matters not who you are, where you come from, what you look like, or what you believe! If their work is meritorious, they are rewarded accordingly.

And this is the ideal model for everything in existence! The open-source project is a model for utopia! Microsoft can't claim that of itself.

Imagine a world in which contention does not exist. Everyone is welcome to achieve according to his talents, skills, means and virtues. Each person is free to judge rationally his environment, and based on his own critical analysis, adopt the life he deems best for himself.

That world is a merit-based system, totally blind to human differences, where economic worth is determined by ability and virtue!

Windows 7 on the other hand is wrought of greed, avarice, slaying the weak out of arrogance, corporate privilege and elitism, minds that operate against right reason, and using ignorant masses for fun and profit.

I hope this helps.

That's great. For you. Libraries are not forcibly done. They exist, but they only point to one location which is just like a symlink (isn't it?). One sets up their own Libraries, or doesn't. If they do, the functionality exceeds the capabilities of a symlink (and is certainly easier to do). Many Win7 uses don't like them and don't use them, many very much like them. Your comment isn't helpful. I've already addressed this kind of "you're doing it wrong" response earlier.

Yes, the solution is to try to find a solution, which is why i'm here. Why do i need to defend my interest in Linux and ask if people know of a way to do something that i think works very well in Windows 7? And i said "one less thing to stop me" - Libraries are not the /only/ thing stopping me from making the switch. There's a tonne of apps i need to find adequate replacements for and various other stuff.

You are pretty much wrong and you're forgiven. I have already invested dozens (probably a hundred by now) of hours researching and playing with Linux. I have a family, real human beings who need my attention and other real-life activities too. There's a limit to how much time i can spend on learning it. Remember, i'm a really a user, not a hacker. It hasn't replaced Windows for me yet because i prefer some aspects of Windows and i'm trying to learn if i can do what i want/like in Linux (Libraries and other bits and bobs), and of course there's rather a lot more application choices in Windows land. I'd still need Windows occasionally, including for games (and yes - i've installed Steam on my XFCE netbook and even played a game on it!). Though i suppose Steam is considered a great evil due to the annoying DRM it employs. The main reason i've looked toward Linux is the ideological reason behind Linux: because Windows satisfactorily caters for the technological reasons.

What is a feature of Linux that is very important to your workflow that isn't in Windows? Now, try to use Windows without that feature. Disregard the ideological angles and base the assessment purely on the technical solutions being offered: one OS has what you want and what you're used to, the other doesn't seem to. Maybe you'd search to see if it is something available in a different way to what you're used to and enjoy various people telling you you're doing it wrong. Maybe you'd come here and ask if it's possible, and how. Empathy please; put yourself in my shoes.

Of course i could adapt to Linux without this feature but i would actually prefer to see this feature in Linux. I get told over and over again that Linux is about choice, well it's not a choice if it doesn't exist. It's kinda like a 'typical' American's perception of freedom (generalisations are generally inappropriate), failing to recognise that freedom without opportunity is, as Chomsky put it "the devils gift".

Ugh.. this is getting annoying. I'm spending more time reading why i'm wrong and responding (not exclusively this response, or here) instead of focussing on the possibilities people have suggested.

Lastly, my kids will be using Linux when they need computers for school.

Bugger. Thanks for looking.

I got distracted with the above and also i installed Mint XFCE 15 (was using 13) before doing the updates and then installed Krusader but haven't had a chance to have a look at its capabilities (RLCF - Real Life Comes First).

With respect, the sort of tools i can pick up and make work will not help

I didn't know Mac has the same kind of thing with "Spotlight". That is a very old post, referring to Vista Beta. I Wiki'd it:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_folder#Windows
and

GNOME
A saved search in GNOME 2.14
That sounds interesting. Not sure what kind of criteria are able to be used - i would like to use directories and shares, rather than file filtering.

Thanks! More reading and some experimenting (hopefully tomorrow).

I agree I don't need to be sold on the merits of Free Software and Linux. What i need is help, time and knowledge.

I hadn't thought to talk to Gnome3 direct. To be honest, i'd feel like a bit of a turkey talking to the Gnome3 gods, do they have a section specifically for feature requests?

Now that i've realised i should perhaps be using the term "virtual folders" i'm seeing a lot more information out there in LinuxLand which gives me hope there is something acceptably usable. But i'd still like it to be easy/er

You asked a question:

And I answered it.

I never said you were doing it wrong. You claimed to want to understand why this feature was not the norm in Linux, and I attempted to explain it to you. By and large, the "Linux community" you reference--myself included--tends to want to know and control what is going on in their computers, and not have artificial layers of "intuitive" (your word) abstraction added on. As I and several others have tried to tell you, there are fundamental differences between how Linux and Windows users approach their computers and what we want from them. This is one of them.

You can attempt to dictate the responses of people here all you want, but we will say what we think. Why you seem to believe we are somehow in service to you and must respond the way you wish is rather beyond me. It may be another Windows mentality that comes from paying someone for software support. If you truly wish to learn and benefit from Linux and open source, you will have to assimilate a new way of thinking about this. You can say that's not helpful, but I believe it is one of the most important things to learn.

And yes, Windows libraries certainly are forcibly done. If you go into any Windows 7 base installation, you will see that the first location under "Desktop" in Windows Explorer is called "Libraries." Documents, Music, Pictures, and Videos libraries are all present by default. Under these libraries you will find links to directories like My Documents and Public Documents, My Videos and Public Videos, etc. You can add locations to the libraries I presume, but the base structure is there upon installation.

And when I hear the word "intuitive," I interpret it to mean, "I don't have to know what I'm doing to use it." Again, that's Windows, not Linux.

i doubt there will be a distribution or distribuitons that enable it by default. i think the libraries are annoying (i wish there was a way to shut it off in windows but when i navigate 'my computer' it brings me to the libraries folder by default but i simply clik on the actual directory tree to get to where i want which is a minor annoyance).

you seem to be the minority here so you will need to investigate how to enable that functionality manually (i think allend mentioned there is a way to do it in linux).

fyi. this seems related: http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...es-4175473128/

I just don't understand how making access to files faster is a bad thing. I haven't found it no more difficult to know where the file i'm looking for resides, and i've found it a lot easier to get to.


I think the difference isn't between Windows and Linux users, it's between users and hackers.


I don't think you're in service to me, you're welcome to not comment at all. You can drop the "Windows mentality" angle; that's your bigotry not mine. I'm just asking for a way to do something that would make my ability to access data using Linux easier and faster than i can presently understand how to do in Linux. You're telling me what i happen to like is an abstract way to do it, and perhaps it is, but it makes managing data easier and faster. Basically you're saying "you're doing it wrong", or at very least "i don't understand why you would want to access data that way".

What exactly is the way of thinking that i should assimilate to? (A geniuine question.) Maybe it will help me decide if i'm a suitable potential convert.


You're right, they exist to start with. But removing the "public" folders is a piece of piss and then they are just links to a directory like any other. Or if you choose you can remove the Libraries all-together with a simple registry hack (found in less than 5 seconds on Google). It's a choice i don't see available in Linux. If it were opt-in instead of opt-out would that make it more acceptable?

Unless i fluke it every time, of course i have to know what i'm doing to use it (ie, make use of it), by definition. Should i also need to know how it works to be able to use it?

I'm asking about ONE FEATURE that Windows happens to have and i cop all this attitude about it. OSX apparently has similar, and according to AwesomeMachine "There is actually some discussion on the gnome3 mailing list of something akin to Windows 7 libraries functionality.". This isn't a Windows feature, it's a feature in Windows, and it's relatively new to the Windows user-base (since Vista, which no one used). Just pretend Windows doesn't exist, it's irrelevant.

This might do what you want:
http://www.askvg.com/how-to-disable-...-in-windows-7/

1 members found this post helpful.

Usually no. Most things are straight-forward or relatively so. However, you want something most Linux users do not, which is why it has not been developed yet. You have an exceptional desire/need. Unfortunately, that means doing it yourself, which requires knowing how it works. If you decide to try it, good luck. If you are successful, you could post the result as a how-to on various fora for others to use.

Actually it is relevant. As others have explained, the reason this feature has not been embraced by Linux users is because they do not desire it. So like it or not, there does exist a difference in paradigms between Linux thinking and a different way of thinking, whether it be Windows thinking, Recusant thinking or whatever other kind of thinking that may be involved. The systems are different and so are their users. If the systems were the same, there would be no reason for more than one. It is a shame you consider having that pointed out to be flak. It is usually meant to be informative.

1 members found this post helpful.