LinuxQuestions.org
Did you know LQ has a Linux Hardware Compatibility List?
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General
User Name
Password
General This forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!

Notices



Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 02-19-2010, 04:29 AM   #1
SilversleevesX
Member
 
Registered: May 2009
Posts: 181
Blog Entries: 9

Rep: Reputation: 15
Am I the only one to whom this makes no sense ? (unrm & lazarus)


Sometimes it's the little fissures in the pavement that everyone falls into.

The docs and manpage for unrm state pretty explicitly that unrm cannot be used on NTFS partitions.

The docs for lazarus say that it can.

The latter's docs also hint strongly at some doubt about segmenting M$ "chunk" (extension .chk) files.

How useless is this? If the former can't create recovery data "chunks" from NTFS partitions, and the latter can't "cut" the one kind of recovery "chunk" native to the primary OS people run on said partitions, then why did the authors of lazarus even bother to include support for NTFS?

Any ideas, folks?

BZT
 
Old 02-21-2010, 05:10 AM   #2
unSpawn
Moderator
 
Registered: May 2001
Posts: 27,699
Blog Entries: 54

Rep: Reputation: 2962Reputation: 2962Reputation: 2962Reputation: 2962Reputation: 2962Reputation: 2962Reputation: 2962Reputation: 2962Reputation: 2962Reputation: 2962Reputation: 2962
Quote:
Originally Posted by SilversleevesX View Post
How useless is this?
You can simply test it if you have access to other forensic tools: just pitch TCT, TSK, scalpel, foremost, photorec, (FTK, Encase, X-Ways) against each other and find out how effective a tool(kit) is.


Quote:
Originally Posted by SilversleevesX View Post
If the former can't create recovery data "chunks" from NTFS partitions, and the latter can't "cut" the one kind of recovery "chunk" native to the primary OS people run on said partitions, then why did the authors of lazarus even bother to include support for NTFS?
In the case of NTFS you well know it is a proprietary file system (meaning anyone will have difficulties reversing it) and the way NTFS behaves wrt [MFT entry allocation] doesn't make it easy to put that knowledge into practice. In general OSS is in constant flux with rough edges being polishd, bugs being fixed, new features added and that OSS depends on the efforts of volunteers. So that brings me to wonder about the purpose of this thread. Are you part of the solution or is this just venting frustration, another meaningless rant?
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
This makes no freaking sense! Can't isntall Kernel? raid517 Linux - Software 3 05-06-2006 05:14 PM
Sound problem (makes no sense) carlosinfl Fedora 6 07-20-2004 07:40 PM
Shell makes sense, but X? How about a forum? nethbar LQ Suggestions & Feedback 12 05-11-2004 07:43 PM
umask makes no sense shanenin Linux - Software 3 10-31-2003 03:58 AM
Wine Friggin Rules! But this makes no sense... Bigun Linux - General 4 10-28-2002 11:42 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:48 PM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration