Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

10
  • 2
    Is there any reason that dirA or dirB could not simply be a symbolic link to its counterpart? Commented Feb 22, 2017 at 17:37
  • @DopeGhoti Yes: the fundamental fact that they should be in different devices, such as different disks or (as in the second question) different hosts. Commented Feb 22, 2017 at 17:39
  • 2
    Then why don't you just mount dirA on server B? Or, if on the same machine, mount --bind it. Would that be acceptable? Commented Feb 22, 2017 at 17:45
  • 1
    @BowPark I don't really understand what you mean. Please edit your question and give us more details. Specifically, clarify what your final objective is and how links and mounting wouldn't work. Oh, and please specify your OS since that's quite relevant. EDIT: No, I see what you mean, OK. But still, pelase edit and clarify regardless. Commented Feb 22, 2017 at 18:12
  • 1
    @terdon I had previously specified the OS, Ubuntu 14.04. But now I tried to edit the question being more clear. Now I hope it is also clear why symlinks and --bind would not fit. Commented Feb 22, 2017 at 18:20