我对使用的两点看法:

软链接可以用来缩短长路径名，例如:

ln -s /long/folder/name/on/long/path/file.txt /short/file.txt

对/short/file.txt所做的更改将应用于原始文件。

硬链接可以用来移动大文件:

$ ls -lh /myapp/dev/
total 10G
-rw-r--r-- 2 root root 10G May 22 12:09 application.bin

ln /myapp/dev/application.bin /myapp/prd/application.bin

即时复制到不同的文件夹，原始文件(在/myapp/dev上)可以移动或删除，而不会触及/myapp/prd上的文件

另外:

硬链接的读取性能优于符号链接(微性能) 符号链接可以被复制，版本控制，等等。换句话说，它们是一个实际的文件。另一方面，硬链接的级别略低，您会发现，与符号链接相比，提供将硬链接作为硬链接而不是普通文件处理的工具较少

通过一个简单的例子可以看出硬链接和符号链接之间的区别。指向文件的硬链接将指向存储文件的位置，或者指向该文件的inode。符号链接将指向实际文件本身。

因此，如果我们有一个名为“a”的文件，并创建一个硬链接“b”和一个符号链接“c”，它们都指向文件“a”:

echo "111" > a
ln a b
ln -s a c

“a”，“b”和“c”的输出将是:

cat a --> 111
cat b --> 111
cat c --> 111

现在让我们删除文件“a”，看看“a”，“b”和“c”的输出会发生什么:

rm a
cat a --> No such file or directory
cat b --> 111
cat c --> No such file or directory

到底发生了什么?

因为文件“c”指向文件“a”本身，如果文件“a”被删除，那么文件“c”将没有什么可指向的，实际上它也被删除了。

但是，文件“b”指向文件“a”的存储位置或inode。因此，如果文件“a”被删除，那么它将不再指向inode，但由于文件“b”被删除，inode将继续存储属于“a”的任何内容，直到不再有硬链接指向它。

当原始文件被移动时，硬链接非常有用。例如，将文件从/bin移动到/usr/bin或/usr/local/bin。到/bin中文件的任何符号链接都将被破坏，但是硬链接(直接到文件的inode的链接)不会关心。

硬链接可能占用更少的磁盘空间，因为它们只占用一个目录条目，而符号链接需要自己的inode来存储它所指向的名称。

Hard links also take less time to resolve - symlinks can point to other symlinks that are in symlinked directories. And some of these could be on NFS or other high-latency file systems, and so could result in network traffic to resolve. Hard links, being always on the same file system, are always resolved in a single look-up, and never involve network latency (if it's a hardlink on an NFS filesystem, the NFS server would do the resolution, and it would be invisible to the client system). Sometimes this is important. Not for me, but I can imagine high-performance systems where this might be important.

I also think things like mmap(2) and even open(2) use the same functionality as hardlinks to keep a file's inode active so that even if the file gets unlink(2)ed, the inode remains to allow the process continued access, and only once the process closes it does the file really go away. This allows for much safer temporary files (if you can get the open and unlink to happen atomically, which there may be a POSIX API for that I'm not remembering, then you really have a safe temporary file) where you can read/write your data without anyone being able to access it. Well, that was true before /proc gave everyone the ability to look at your file descriptors, but that's another story.

说到这里，恢复一个在进程a中打开，但在文件系统中未链接的文件需要使用硬链接来重新创建inode链接，这样当打开该文件的进程关闭或离开时，该文件不会消失。

我推荐你们去维基百科:

符号链接 硬链接

以下几点:

与硬链接不同，符号链接可以跨文件系统(大多数情况下)。 符号链接可以指向目录。 硬链接指向一个文件，并允许您使用多个名称引用同一个文件。 只要至少有一个链接，数据就仍然可用。

What you think of as an ordinary "file" is actually two separate things: The data of a file, and a directory entry. When you create a hard link for a file, you actually create a second directory entry which refers to the same data. Both directory entries have the exact same functionality; each one can be used to open the file to read it. So you don't really have "a file plus a hard link", you have "file data with two directory entries". What you think of as deleting a file actually deletes a directory entry, and when the last directory entry for the data is deleted, then the data itself is deleted as well. For ordinary files that have only one directory entry, deleting the directory entry will delete the data as always. (While a file is opened, the OS creates a temporary link to the file, so even when you delete all directory entries, the data stays but disappears as soon as you close the file).

例如，创建文件a .txt，硬链接B.txt，然后删除a .txt。当您创建a .txt时，会创建一些数据，并创建一个目录条目a .txt。在创建硬链接时，创建了另一个目录条目B.txt，指向完全相同的数据。当您删除a .txt时，您仍然拥有所有数据和一个目录条目B.txt，就像您首先创建了一个文件B.txt一样。

软链接只是一个(几乎)普通的文件，只是它不包含数据，而是另一个目录条目的路径。如果你删除了软链接所指向的文件，那么软链接将包含一个不再指向目录条目的路径;它坏了。如果你删除软链接，就像删除任何其他文件一样，它指向的文件不受影响。