LinuxQuestions.org
Share your knowledge at the LQ Wiki.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - General
User Name
Password
Linux - General This Linux forum is for general Linux questions and discussion.
If it is Linux Related and doesn't seem to fit in any other forum then this is the place.

Notices

Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 11-27-2006, 06:01 PM   #16
babysparrow
Member
 
Registered: Nov 2005
Location: Worcestershire,UK
Distribution: Fedora Core 3,4,5 ; ububtu 8.10 ; slax6
Posts: 69

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 15
Ditto


exvor : Similar for me. I want Linux, but _need_ XP. So I'd like a place to share data between the OS's (aswell as the aforementioned NSLU2 issue - which is actually more important because it bridges the gap more effectivley).

If Linux is to survive then it needs to appreciate that that people _must_ use XP for all the reasons that are well documented elsewhere.

Sure Linux works well as a server - it always did, but I don't think it can ever be provided on the basis that it will be the sole OS on many home user desktops/laptops. So for that reason it ought to be able to share filesystems. Win32 is not going to go the extra mile!!

I'd say my OS usage (in terms of hours of use) is honestly split 50/50 Linux/XP.

Who can honestly say they never use XP - or don't even have it installed anywhere ?

Surely someone has a similar grasp of this problem ? It's an administration nightmare.
 
Old 11-28-2006, 06:26 AM   #17
nx5000
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2005
Location: Out
Posts: 3,307

Rep: Reputation: 52
Quote:
If Linux is to survive then it needs to appreciate that that people _must_ use XP for all the reasons that are well documented elsewhere.
Linux needs windows to survive, that's funny!
You don't get it. It's *window* that can't natively read anything else that their filesystem, its *not a linux problem*
Have a look at linux capabilities:
http://www.linux-m32r.org/lxr/http/s...n/filesystems/
I wasn't able to find the same document on micro$oft web site..

Go on msdn forum and tell them that other filesystem exist. Tell them that they could code a driver for, say, ext2.
Could it be that they are unable to code it?
Or do you think its because of STRATEGICAL and MARKETING reasons?
You choose
Meanwhile, they are doing something else:
http://news.com.com/Microsofts+file+...3-6025447.html

Anyway I don't want to enter in the big mega thread windows vs linux, that's a waste of time. After 20 years next to computers, I have made up my mind

Use FAT for exchanging. I still don't see any reason for modifying critical permissions and stuff from window...

I just came accross this interesting link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_Allocation_Table
Quote:
Windows 2000 and Windows XP can read and write to FAT32 filesystems of any size, but the format program on these platforms can only create FAT32 filesystems up to 32 GB. Thompson and Thompson (2003) write[5] that “Bizarrely, Microsoft states that this behavior is by design.” Microsoft's knowledge base article 184006[4] indeed confirms the limitation and the by design statement, but gives no rationale or explanation. Peter Norton's opinion[6] is that “Microsoft has intentionally crippled the FAT32 file system.”
 
Old 11-29-2006, 01:43 PM   #18
babysparrow
Member
 
Registered: Nov 2005
Location: Worcestershire,UK
Distribution: Fedora Core 3,4,5 ; ububtu 8.10 ; slax6
Posts: 69

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 15
Reply from info@fs-driver.org

The author of ext2fs has sent me this reply :

Quote:
The ':' character is a problem: The Ext2 driver has to prevent open requests
with the ':' character, because otherwise the image preview feature of Windows
XP Explorer thinks, there is a file system that supports alternate streams
(like NTFS), and may crash.
So the driver must be more strict than the Linux Kernel :-(. I'm sorry I have
not any good idea to workaround it.

The file system error (e2fsck reports on the beginning of its run "..contains a
file system with errors") can occur when a volume wasn't cleanly unmounted and
it is mounted subsequently by Ext2 IFS. When Ext2 IFS mounts an unclean volume,
it proceeds with it, but sets a specific error bit in the Ext2 superblock. It
causes the mentioned message of e2fsck.
Please take care that you unmount a volume before you disconnect it.

Kind regards,
Stephan Schreiber
 
Old 11-29-2006, 02:03 PM   #19
exvor
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2004
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Distribution: LFS-Version SVN-20091202, Arch 2009.08
Posts: 1,485

Rep: Reputation: 66
My old laptop only had linux on it. Only reason this one does is because its used for programming and I like to have multiple enviorments.


Pluse its got a cool remote that I havent figured out how to get working in linux
 
  


Reply

Tags
ext3, write, xp


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 On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Read and Write to Ext3 Filesystem from Windows onto Linux lennysokol Linux - General 34 01-22-2014 09:07 AM
fsck.ext3: Attempt to read block from filesystem trouble dolphans1 Mandriva 12 10-07-2009 04:30 AM
How can I have: Root has Read-Write, user has read only for the boot filesystem? xmrkite Linux - Software 6 10-16-2008 04:31 AM
Cant write or read ext3 partitions?!?!?! wasabi Linux - General 9 06-17-2004 07:07 AM
how do I change the filesystem from read-only to read-write? les_chow Linux - Newbie 5 05-26-2004 03:14 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:37 PM.

Main Menu
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