|
From: Pawel K. <pk...@be...> - 2004-02-26 14:39:14
|
On Thu, 26 Feb 2004, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote: > On Thu, 26 Feb 2004, Pawel Kot wrote: > > > > > > Secondly and most importantly, you _need_ Windows to do this. And that's > > > silly :-) > > > > Why would you need NTFS without Windows anyway ;-) I really think it is > > NTFS development? Regression testing? For example I've never had Windows > in my life until recently, just for the sole purpose to _validate_ the > Linux NTFS code I write. Soon after my disk crashed and I couldn't recover I think your case is too rare. I started looking at linux-ntfs when I got laptop from my work with Windows XP preinstalled and wanted Linux there also. In other words, Windows installed on my laptop was the motivation to get involved with linux-ntfs. > Also, do millions of device developer vendors (camera, mp3 players, etc) > need Windows to make their filesystem FAT? Surely not. How will you > delete, organize your things in your gadgets when (and if) vendors will > change to NTFS from the long outdated FAT? I don't think it will ever happen. FAT is easy and simple and as such filesystem it will remain for such solutions for a really long time. If it will be replaced by any filesystem, I don't think it will be NTFS, which is too complicated for such solution. Think on amount of work put in linux-ntfs (or even captive) and imagine how it would be possible to implement ntfs support in a digital camera. No, I don't think it will happen. > I think, this regrettable "You need NTFS, you Windows loser?" mentality > and _misconception_ is one of the reasons that the Linux NTFS support > didn't get very far. But please don't take it personally, your wording > was pretty polite compared to others :-) Well, I need NTFS support because I use Windows. It's true. And I think this is true for over 99% of linux-ntfs users. And I don't think that anyone using Windows is a looser, really ;-) > > not the problem if Anton is right in regard that Windows will convert on > > mount. > > I'm afraid Anton is not right for all situations. If no-one checks I'll do > it when I have the possibility. I don't claim Anton is always right ;-) I also don't claim that we don't need 3.x support. I'm just saing that if Anton is right, lack of the support for 3.x in mkntfs is not really a problem. take care, pkot -- mailto:pk...@be... http://www.gnokii.org/ |
