On Thu, 15 Jan 2004, Darrell Esau wrote:
> I'm not sure how "massively used" the write feature is on a file
> system driver which can only overwrite existing files (without
> changing the length)."
I've meant the resizer and the driver. In numbers? A minimum guess is
several hundred thousands. From where the guess? Downloads, feedbacks.
E.g. TopologiLinux installs on a loopback mounted file on NTFS (or FAT).
Half million downloads (there are more NT based user than DOS based).
NT/W2K/XP password recovery 2.5 million downloads. Several Live CD use the
loopback trick to keep home, config files on NTFS. Others interated the
NTFS resizer in their install, just as there are also live rescue/admin
CD's having it.
Yes, write support is pretty limited but it's stable and constantly used
over a year.
NTFS is a huge project. The Windows driver is over half MB, just like XFS.
Here is a list of the source sizes from the 2.6.1 kernel.
kByte filesystem
3700 xfs
904 jfs
784 reiserfs
592 ntfs
396 ext3
264 ext2
92 fat
36 vfat
There are two very busy developers (in their life, not in coding). If time
allows one of them is generating and testing the obsolote NTFS binary
driver for Red Hat and Fedora (the stable driver can't be made as a binary
without some minor kernel source changes and he was ignored when he
requested). In short, nobody should expect fast progress ...
> Don't get me wrong, I don't mean to start a flame war -- I think this is a
No, no. Please just ask. I think the root of the "problem" is the
extremely strong FUD around NTFS.
patented? -> nobody find anything
undocumented? -> read the the url I sent before and the source
changes all the time -> in the last 8 years there weren't significant
ones and Longhorn uses the same as XP and W2K3
MS breaks it? -> no, it was lazy Linux driver coding that
destroyed so many people data years ago.
experimental? -> the old is broken, new is stable
all ntfs is stable -> no, there are many different implementations
(partimage, mondo, sleuthkit, captive, etc)
actively developed? -> no, maybe some hours a week
etc.
If we could get the facts right, maybe somebody will volunteer to finish
it because realizes it's not as hopeless as geneally believed. It's just
hard and lot's of work :)
> great project -- I use the driver for reading of NTFS volumes, but it's very
If you use the old driver (version 1, quite probably) then you definitely
shouldn't try it at all! Actually write got disabled for W2K and XP
(unfortunately unless you remount).
> misleading to claim that this driver has any useful write functions.
You wouldn't believe how many happy users thanked even these limited write
functions ;)
Szaka
