Mount a network folder to a folder instead of a drive?


Recommended Posts

Hi all. I am using WinXP Pro SP2 and am wondering if it is possible to map a directory on a network to a local folder. Sort of like the Map Network Drive feature, but that only lets you map to a drive letter, which is not what I want to do. :) On that note, I even tried mapping the network folder to a drive letter and changing the mount in Computer Management, but of course the Disk Management only shows physical drives. :/

In summary, I want the following path:

C:\Folder1\Folder2\Etc\ThisFolder

to point to:

\\somecomputer\NetFolder

Does anyone know of an XP feature that will do this? If not, is there any 3rd party software that will do this?

Thanks in advance :)

Silly question, but are you just trying to create a folder as follows:

On Server

C:\Some_Folder\folder_with_files_I_Need

On Desktop

C:\Some_Folder\Folder_With_Files_I_Need <------Mapped from server

If this is what you want, then cant you just right click in the folder you want to pace the mapped folder and select create shortcut. Then type in the location such as \\Server\Some_Folder\Folder_With_Files_I_Need.

It worked when i tried it just now, or maybe this is not what you are wanting?

  kevinmd88 said:
Hi all. I am using WinXP Pro SP2 and am wondering if it is possible to map a directory on a network to a local folder. Sort of like the Map Network Drive feature, but that only lets you map to a drive letter, which is not what I want to do. :) On that note, I even tried mapping the network folder to a drive letter and changing the mount in Computer Management, but of course the Disk Management only shows physical drives. :/

In summary, I want the following path:

C:\Folder1\Folder2\Etc\ThisFolder

to point to:

\\somecomputer\NetFolder

Does anyone know of an XP feature that will do this? If not, is there any 3rd party software that will do this?

Thanks in advance :)

What you have shown looks like it would apply to what i said. Simply delete the current folder in the Etc folder and instead create a shortcut to \\somecomputer\NetFolder.

That was my first try as far as getting this done, but I need Windows and programs to actually see it as a folder, not a shortcut. So that programs/users/Windows think it's on the drive but it's actually, what I guess would be called a "symlink" to the network folder.

A shortcut is only a shortcut so programs won't be able to access the folder on the drive as if they were using the network.

  kevinmd88 said:
That was my first try as far as getting this done, but I need Windows and programs to actually see it as a folder, not a shortcut. So that programs/users/Windows think it's on the drive but it's actually, what I guess would be called a "symlink" to the network folder.

A shortcut is only a shortcut so programs won't be able to access the folder on the drive as if they were using the network.

If your just worried that users will see its a shortcut, then just use tweak UI to remove the arrow on shortcuts?

  kevinmd88 said:
Hi all. I am using WinXP Pro SP2 and am wondering if it is possible to map a directory on a network to a local folder. Sort of like the Map Network Drive feature, but that only lets you map to a drive letter, which is not what I want to do. :) On that note, I even tried mapping the network folder to a drive letter and changing the mount in Computer Management, but of course the Disk Management only shows physical drives. :/

In summary, I want the following path:

C:\Folder1\Folder2\Etc\ThisFolder

to point to:

\\somecomputer\NetFolder

Does anyone know of an XP feature that will do this? If not, is there any 3rd party software that will do this?

Thanks in advance :)

We have done what you are asking for on our network here. We change the path on My Documents folder on XP-SP2 from local disk to a location on the server. First, a login script runs that maps a letter to a folder on the server. Then based on that letter, we remove the default under properties on My Documents and change it to "U:\". Since the user already has a mapped drive called "P:\\server-name\user name" the user has access to that drive by simply putting "U:\". In your case, you might want to share the drive/folder first and give proper rights to the user/s.

Well it's not just users, I also need programs to recognize it as an actual folder instead of a shortcut. I may be wrong, but if I put a shortcut called "IamAShortcut" and point it to a folder on the D: drive, and in that folder there is a file called "IamAFile.txt," I am fairly sure I can't type "IAmAShortcut\IamAFile.txt" to access that file. . .

The folder I am trying to create unfortunately isn't in the My Documents folder so that doesn't help, but thanks for the tip :)

  kevinmd88 said:
Well it's not just users, I also need programs to recognize it as an actual folder instead of a shortcut. I may be wrong, but if I put a shortcut called "IamAShortcut" and point it to a folder on the D: drive, and in that folder there is a file called "IamAFile.txt," I am fairly sure I can't type "IAmAShortcut\IamAFile.txt" to access that file. . .

The folder I am trying to create unfortunately isn't in the My Documents folder so that doesn't help, but thanks for the tip :)

No you couldnt access IamAFile.txt by creating a folder shortcut, but creating a shortcut directly to that file?

Well that would mean having to create shortcuts for every file in the directory, not to mention the programs still couldn't use them to access the files because they end in .lnk instead of the proper extension. I need to basically "fool" programs, etc., into thinking the network folder is on the local disk.

  kevinmd88 said:
Well that would mean having to create shortcuts for every file in the directory, not to mention the programs still couldn't use them to access the files because they end in .lnk instead of the proper extension. I need to basically "fool" programs, etc., into thinking the network folder is on the local disk.

I really dont understand the problem with what i said? You can even turn on syncronisation to make the drive available offline.

I think either you or I am missing or not understanding eachother, because i have what i said working at home and it works flawlessely.

If I just create a shortcut called "ThisFolder" in "C:\Folder1\Folder2\Etc" and point it to "\\somecomputer\NetFolder," and in the NetFolder there is a file called "file.txt" I won't be able to access said file with the path "C:\Folder1\Folder2\Etc\ThisFolder\file.txt" because it's a shortcut not an actual folder. In Windows if you double click the shortcut it will take you to the target directory, but if I use the Start->Run box or if a program tries to access it like that, it won't be able to find the file because the shortcut is not an actual folder on the drive.

Sorry for not being clear before :)

  kevinmd88 said:
If I just create a shortcut called "ThisFolder" in "C:\Folder1\Folder2\Etc" and point it to "\\somecomputer\NetFolder," and in the NetFolder there is a file called "file.txt" I won't be able to access said file with the path "C:\Folder1\Folder2\Etc\ThisFolder\file.txt" because it's a shortcut not an actual folder. In Windows if you double click the shortcut it will take you to the target directory, but if I use the Start->Run box or if a program tries to access it like that, it won't be able to find the file because the shortcut is not an actual folder on the drive.

Sorry for not being clear before :)

Ah ok, i think i see what your saying.

Then you would type it as follows:

c:\Test\Test\somefile.exe.lnk

That would work, but probably not what you are looking for.

Sorry for getting abrupt, but i really didnt understand what the problem was for you.

SysInternals (now Windows SysInternals) have a tool called Junction which allows you to create mount points (symbolic links) through you file system. Windows doesn't actually support this for remote shares, but local folders it works a treat. Junction is a console application, it has no UI.

You can download it from http://www.microsoft.com/technet/sysintern...k/Junction.mspx

Usage: junction <junction> <target>

e.g junction C:\Tools\MyFolder C:\Windows\System32.

When you explore C:\Tools\MyFolder, you are actually exploring System32.

Hope that helps.

  antaris said:
SysInternals (now Windows SysInternals) have a tool called Junction which allows you to create mount points (symbolic links) through you file system. Windows doesn't actually support this for remote shares, but local folders it works a treat. Junction is a console application, it has no UI.

You can download it from http://www.microsoft.com/technet/sysintern...k/Junction.mspx

Usage: junction <junction> <target>

e.g junction C:\Tools\MyFolder C:\Windows\System32.

When you explore C:\Tools\MyFolder, you are actually exploring System32.

Hope that helps.

Thanks for the tip, I actually tried junction yesterday and found out it doesn't have that functionality for network folders. :)

I think it's time I gave up on this, it doesn't appear that it can be done. If it could I'm sure I would have found a solution by now, or someone here would know something - for sure before I would. :) Thanks to all that tried to help me, it's much appreciated.

  MarlboroNeo said:
Have you tried mounting the network forder as a local Drive:

Then use juntion to "juntion" the local drive to the folder you want.

\\Network folder\ -> Drive x:

juntion x -> c: \whatever\juntion folder\

Actually yes. . . it appears that any and all programs I've found/tried only work on physical volumes, not virtual drives as I think they're called. It didn't work in Disk Management or with any of the programs I've tried.

Never mind this thread, I gave up on this already :) Thanks for all the help though.

If a mod could close this thread?

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • A 10% IPC boost is underwhelming for what is supposed to be a major generational leap. Unless it's accompanied by higher clock speeds, or the IPC boost is greater than 10% in games, I'm not sure that it will be enough to compete with Zen 5 X3D, let alone Zen 6 X3D for gaming. Single-core performance is super important and cannot be compensated with more cores, whereas the reverse is true, you can compensate for fewer cores with better single-core performance.
    • Been happy with Windows 11 myself even since first release in 2021, sure it hasn't always been perfect, but nothing is per say.. Issues i did have was minor ones, which is normal with any OS really. I still use Windows 10 at times on my unsupported Gaming Laptop, and i find myself using the Windows 11 Desktop more. Eventually replacing Gaming Laptop with a Windows 11 Compatible one somehow, someway this year or possibly next year at the latest, but its gonna happen--(May save all my Bing reward points except the 1000 to have extended support for 10) then work on getting quality Replacement hard)
    • Geez, this is dumb. I use my laptop sometimes in the dark when doing astrophotography to control my astro-PC... this explains why I have to keep entering my PIN when logging back in. So stupid. I can't see the keyboard in the dark, and I can't have lights everywhere to light it up because everything is very light sensitive (including my eyes!).
    • Naturally. I don't care about brand loyalty at all as it's all about price/performance/reliability etc (even what RejZoR said below is a great point to). basically bang-for-the-buck. because at the end of the day... one wants the cheapest possible price to maintain a certain minimum level of performance (or thereabouts). because generally after a certain point with CPU and GPU's the price starts to sky rocket without that much difference in performance where it really matters. p.s. historically I have bought more Intel CPU's and NVIDIA GPU's but I have had some AMD CPU's and one AMD GPU.
    • Both of these companies as well as Qualcomm and Apple need competition. Otherwise, they just coast. I don't prefer macOS, though I like some of Apple's hardware, but if anyone needs competition, it is Apple. Their prices are already outrageous and they need to have a reason to produce good hardware and at least keep prices remotely reasonable. (It is criminal what they charge for RAM upgrades especially.) Qualcomm needs to push AMD and Intel not to be so sloppy with the performance/efficiency aspect. Granted, AMD has been doing quite well in this respect considering they are not an ARM architecture. I personally want to have more options that truly compete with Macbook Air and Macbook Pro's on the Windows side. It is difficult to achieve what Apple does since they control the entire stack and that is fundamentally different for Windows PCs other than maybe Microsoft Surface PCs.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      Hartej earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Year In
      TsunadeMama earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Week One Done
      shaheen earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Dedicated
      Cole Multipass earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Week One Done
      Alexander 001 earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      565
    2. 2
      +FloatingFatMan
      182
    3. 3
      ATLien_0
      175
    4. 4
      Skyfrog
      111
    5. 5
      Som
      106
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!