Symbolic Links As Symbolic Links Possible?

Recently installed isync-headless 1.5.5 on a cloud server (Amazon Linux 2 running on an EC2 server), as well as my Mac (El Capitan), and was hoping to sync some files between them. Everything is working as expected EXCEPT that symbolic links external to the Insync folder are being replicated as the files that the links point to, and not as symbolic links. [Symbolic links within the Insync folder are NOT replicating, but I understand that is intentional and by design?]

But my question is whether it is possible to replicate symbolic links as symbolic links, and not the files that the symbolic links point to.

If that is currently not possible, I would like to suggest it as a feature.


I was told it is by design and I agree that this is how it should work. Having files specific to a machine using links outside the Google Drive is (IMO) very important to have. Not sure where the devs keep their roadmap, but it would be nice to see this on it.

Hi @David_Filip,

This feature request is noted. :relaxed:

Just going to set your expectations on this though and let you know that this feature is not within our immediate concerns…so it’ll probably take a while before any developments on this can be worked out.

But thank you so much for your feedback (you too, @MichelvdL) We really appreciate it :heart_eyes:

Does new Insync 3.0 branch have some improvements on symlink sync support?

I hope the InSync team realizes how important it is to provide the ability to save linux symlinks as symlinks, or at least ignore them. Our team often creates symlinks in their home directories to large data files that we don’t want synched. Should be easy to do from the “ignore rules”. We are unable to use InSync because of this.

1 Like

Apparently not, I’ve requested this as soon as insync 3.X was released. I tried it and learned that Insync 3.X did NOT follow symlinks. Subsequent requests have just garnered suggestions that I use the feature to backup additional folders outside the Google Drive folder using 3.Xs feature to do so. Sorry, but creating a symlink just works better for me and is so much easier AND it works - period. With tools like the HardLinkShell extension it’s just a right click and hold and drag and drop. No menus or folder navigation is required beyond that.

I’ve stuck with Insync 1.5X for now. Should they drop support for it I guess that we will just part ways. I’d even pay for an upgrade if they could just get symlinks to work in 3.X.

As for the OPs question. I can see that this should be a feature. I’ve seen it in other tools. I’ve seen where you can check a box to have it FOLLOW symlinks or simply copy the symlink itself - dealers choice.

I hope the authors realize this is holding back their product and that without it their product is not so useful.

I obviously agree this is important — having raised this back in May — and to be honest, is a show-stopper for me. I purchased InSync without knowing this limitation, and therefore, although I own a license, I am not using the product because of lack of symlink support. I never tried to get a refund only because I am still hoping that one day it will be added as an option.

To elaborate, my use case is using symlinks WITHIN InSync — pointing to files in different directories within the same sync’ed folders — so I’m not even looking for external link support, although that would be nice / expected, but is not a show-stopper for me.

So I will continue to subscribe to this forum, in the hopes that someday proper symlink support will be added as a feature.

[In the mean time, I am running NFS through a VPN tunnel on a private cloud server I’m paying $$ for— not ideal, and more effort and cost and complexity – but my application needs real symlink support.]

I know this is an old topic, but symlinks are still unsupported. Any plans on changing that?

Hi @gernophil,

I will circle back on this with our Product Team in light of the upcoming changes that Google has deployed re: shortcuts. Let me check where symlinks are in our pipeline. Thank you for bumping this thread!