On Jul 18 3:50, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >On Jul 17 11:44, Harry G McGavran Jr wrote: >> > I just had to deal with the output from chkdsk on my Windows 7 pro >> > that lists MFT record numbers just like ifind and icat do >> > in the Sleuth Kit as summarized in: >> > >> > https://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2012-11/msg00172.html >> > >> > The chkdsk MFT record numbers are exactly what ifind and icat >> > display/use. I also discovered when doing "ls -i" on NTFS >> > file systems mounted on my Ubuntu 16.04 linux system that >> > the "ls -i" numbers reported are the same as the chkdsk, ifind, and icat >> > record numbers. These are all the lower 32 bits of the 64 bit >> > numbers reported by "ls -i" with the current cygwin. Had >> > the cygwin "find -inum" and "ls -i" used these 32 bit numbers, >> > my task would have been easier. From the above link, Corinna >> > found it odd that ifind and icat would use the 32 bit numbers. >> > I would have preferred them when dealing with chkdsk issues. >> > >> > What's the current thinking about this? > >The descriptions I found describes the NTFS FileID as a combination >of the 16 bit sequence number with the 48 bit file record number(*). >Stripping off 16 bits sequence number would be ok, but stripping the >upper 16 bit from a 48 bit record number sounds bad. > >OTOH, the maximum number of files on an NTFS volume is restricted >to the number of clusters, which is 2^32-1. > >If it's *safe* to assume that the record number corresponds with >the cluster number, ok, but I'm not sure this is the case. I never >use really big filesystems with Windows. This would need testing. > >But then there's another problem. The 64 bit file ID can also be >used to open a file by ID. Stripping the upper 32 bit from the >value disallows to use the file ID in that way. > > >Corinna >
Thanks for the thoughts and info -- based on that info, personally, I'd go for returning the bottom 48 bit file record number. That is apparently what ntfs-3g developers felt was appropriate under linux (Ubuntu 16.04 at least) and would allow people chasing down chkdsk issues to make using cygwin find and ls easier. Harry -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple