Jules2 -
Still trying to wrap my brain arround the file system structure, it is different?
The DOS/Windows file system is loosely based on Unix file systems (and the Unix file system is adapted in Linux). Most of the commands have equivalents there. Two things to note:
1. Unix file system commands (like much of Unix) developed as a hodgepodge of student projects. This has left a legacy of inconsistant and bizzare commands. Personally, my favorite for bizzare options is tar, a utility that has expanded over the years to do just about anything (if you want to devote the greater part of your brain to remembering the options...).
Some people take great occult pride in being expert with tar.
I recommend learning a simple set of command line utilities with a useful set of options for each, and don't worry about the rest.
2. Unix file systems do one thing very well which Windows still does lamely - virtual file and directories links. Using ln -s (link symbolic) you can reference any file or directory anywhere (network, other local drives, etc.) to any convenient place in your local file system. (In fact, multiple partitions are linked to root in way, so that the partition looks like a subdirectory.) Syntax:
ln -s ActualFilename LinkFileName
where ActualFilename includes the destination path and LinkFileName defaults to starting in your current directory and can include a directory path. You can even make links within linked directories if you have write permission in the remote directory.
The ability to do symbolic links is the biggest fundamental difference between Unix and Windows file systems.
(Windows does have a lame mount point capability, but it is very limited and it hard codes the path - which makes it useless from a server, where the local mount path is different from the client's mount point. When you set up a link from a Unix file system, it chains so that you can jump from link to sublinks across multiple servers just like ordinary local subdirectories.)
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
