• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Accessing (reading and writing) WINDOWS XP/2000/NT from LINUX.

J

JohnBernstein

Banned
Accessing (reading and writing) WINDOWS XP/2000/NT from LINUX.

Interested in using NTFS-FUSE to write to WINDOWS XP/2000[/b] partitions (NTFS formatted).

Or alternatively, using Captive-FUSE to write to WINDOWS XP/2000 partitions (NTFS formatted).

Then go here:

http://linux.coconia.net/

There is a page on installing Windows on a spare partition on you harddrive.

There is also instructions on HOWTO access and write to Windows XP/2000 (formatted with the NTFS) from Linux.

Access to Windows by Captive-FUSE and NTFS-FUSE are compared.
 
By the way the tests of speed for the 2 ways of writing to windows XP at:

http://linux.coconia.net/general/ntfs-tests.htm

have a problem as the write will not have finished when the 2nd date command is given.

This is because much of the file will have been cached in memory.

This has been suggested this as a solution:

sync; time (cp file1 file1; sync)

What do you think?
 
I tried it. It doesn't work as such:
I had to write "cp file1 file1; sync" as a tiny script called "script " then enter

sync; time script
 
Originally posted by: JohnBernstein
By the way the tests of speed for the 2 ways of writing to windows XP at:

http://linux.coconia.net/general/ntfs-tests.htm

have a problem as the write will not have finished when the 2nd date command is given.

This is because much of the file will have been cached in memory.

This has been suggested this as a solution:

sync; time (cp file1 file1; sync)

What do you think?
Click to expand...
It turns out that this adjustment didn't make much difference.

 
And you still haven't posted any specific questions about it.
Click to expand...
I didn't/don't have any specific questions about it.

I assume that a kernel driver that writes to NTFS partitions would be much more efficient/quicker than code using the FUSE structure.

I was wondering why the read/write code was not just fixed, rather than building bits of it into a larger less efficient edifice.

I was also wondering how much work would be involved in changing/rewriting the NTFS-FUSE code as a kernel module.
 
It is not. The problem wit the NTFS write module that is (correctly) not compiled into the kernel has a MAJOR limitation. It cannot create files, only change them if I remember correctly. And even then, you cannot enlarge the file.
 
I assume that a kernel driver that writes to NTFS partitions would be much more efficient/quicker than code using the FUSE structure.
Click to expand...

That would probably be correct, but not by any noticable numbers. The only real difference would be the need to copy data between the kernel/userland a few extra times in the FUSE module and at worst that'll only add a few ms to each call that requires it.

I was wondering why the read/write code was not just fixed, rather than building bits of it into a larger less efficient edifice.
Click to expand...

The read code doesn't need fixed and the write code is being fixed, slowly as they reverse engineer the on-disk data structures.
 
Then maybe it is just a manpower issue, I haven't really kept up since I don't have a need for it, but if you're that concerned with Linux's NTFS support why don't you help out and speed up the process?

That's for posting a link to that thread though, it was quite entertaining. I particularly like the "If that is the attitude of an actual NTFS-FUSE developer i don't think there is much hope for it." comment which I totally agree with.
 
Originally posted by: Nothinman
Then maybe it is just a manpower issue, I haven't really kept up since I don't have a need for it, but if you're that concerned with Linux's NTFS support why don't you help out and speed up the process?
Click to expand...
I might yet do that.
 
Originally posted by: Nothinman
Thanks for posting a link to that thread though, it was quite entertaining. I particularly like the "If that is the attitude of an actual NTFS-FUSE developer i don't think there is much hope for it." comment which I totally agree with.
Click to expand...
You are welcome.

Initially, I thought someone was just using Patrick Volkerding's name.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top