Linux-Advocacy Digest #951, Volume #31 Sun, 4 Feb 01 02:13:02 EST
Contents:
Re: Suggestions (SERIOUS ones please) requested (Mike Martinet)
Re: More Mandrake Fun :( (Bill Sharrock)
Re: NTFS Limitations ("Chad Myers")
Re: NTFS Limitations ("Chad Myers")
Re: NTFS Limitations (Was: RE: Red hat becoming illegal?) ("Chad Myers")
Re: NTFS Limitations (J Sloan)
Re: NTFS Limitations (Was: RE: Red hat becoming illegal?) (Jim Richardson)
Re: The 130MByte text file (Jim Richardson)
Re: NTFS Limitations (Jim Richardson)
Re: NTFS Limitations (Was: RE: Red hat becoming illegal?) ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: NTFS Limitations (Was: RE: Red hat becoming illegal?) ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: NTFS Limitations (Was: RE: Red hat becoming illegal?) ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Sound a networks ("Tom Wilson")
Re: NTFS Limitations (Was: RE: Red hat becoming illegal?) ("Ayende Rahien")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Mike Martinet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Suggestions (SERIOUS ones please) requested
Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2001 22:03:17 -0700
Alan Peterson wrote:
>
> Can anyone direct me to a source of info -- print, web or otherwise
> -- describing only the fundamentals of tying together three Win machines
> to a Linux server and what it would take for them to communicate? This
> is for a simple home rig only.
> Before someone suggests "Ditch the Windows machines entirely", I
> WOULD in a second if there were comparable multitrack audio editing
> programs available that would run under Linux. I am locked into what my
> local machines must be and do, but the server is up for grabs.
> Any suggestion/direction is welcome, as long as it is relevant and
> not a rant.
> Thx. -ap
The Windows machines are all capable of talking to each other without
any help from anything other than a hub. And, if you're running Win2k
or ME (I don't know, but I'd guess it was so, I haven't seen ME) you can
pick one machine to share an internet connection.
So, what is it you want to do that makes you think you require a Linux
machine in the first place?
At any one time I have up to 4 Windows machines being served high-speed
access by a Linux server. I also use the Linux box for a test-bed when
programming and I like to keep a journal - VI being the greatest
non-wysiwyg editor ever.
MjM
------------------------------
From: Bill Sharrock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: More Mandrake Fun :(
Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2001 05:10:01 GMT
No. The difference is I can suspend disbelief with his story. Yours I
cannot.
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: NTFS Limitations
Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2001 05:05:48 GMT
"J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Chad Myers wrote:
>
> > "J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > > We know no such thing, it's purely a groundless allegation
> > > on your part.
> >
> > Not really. Looking at the facts, that is a logical conclusion.
>
> I notice that once again, you carefully snipped my
> reference to the major auto manufacturer website.
Seeing as how you post half-facts and misrepresent the rest, I rarely
see the point in posting your entire post. I find the first lie I can
and expose it, the rest of your post is irrelevant after that.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: NTFS Limitations
Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2001 05:08:33 GMT
"Giuliano Colla" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> >
> > Chad Myers wrote:
> > >
> > > So basically, in every scientific and meaningful survey (i.e. business
> > > web sites), MS holds a strong majority.
> > >
> > > What say you to that?
> >
> > From Netcraft:
> >
> > "However this debate still has a long way to run, with the
> > same community quickly responding to charges that Linux has a long
> > way to go to solve business problems that large companies face,
> > by pointing out that in the wake of its own DNS outages
> > Microsoft itself has moved some of its key DNS servers
> > to Linux by outsourcing this to Akamai."
>
<SNIP: one specific example of one web server that is on Linux that
isn't a my cat fluffy site>
Look, the simple facts are, that a large majority of businesses run
their critical eCommerce and SSL transactions on Windows. Several
Fortune 500, Global 2000 and various SSL surveys all confirm this.
You can cite a thousand examples, and it won't mean squat because
there are millions more that counter your claims.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: NTFS Limitations (Was: RE: Red hat becoming illegal?)
Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2001 05:11:45 GMT
"The Ghost In The Machine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Chad Myers
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote
> on Sat, 03 Feb 2001 02:17:38 GMT
> <6TJe6.3506$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> >"Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:95ehmi$pgs$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> [snip]
>
> >> A> I don't want a user-level program to be able to do this. It has to be
> >> Admin level access at the very least.
> >> B> AFAIK, there isn't NT defrag APIs, at least not on NT4, which is why
they
> >> licensed some one else code for the 2K defrager.
> >
> >Executive Software (makers of DiskKeeper) requested MS put cluster mapping
> >and remapping APIs in the kernel to aid in defragmenting the disk.
> >
> >http://www.sysinternals.com/ntw2k/info/defrag.shtml
> >
> >FSCTL_GET_VOLUME_BITMAP
> >FSCTL_GET_RETRIEVAL_POINTERS
> >FSCTL_MOVE_FILE
> >FSCTL_READ_MFT_RECORD
> >
> >These were added as part of the NtFsControlFile native function.
>
> Proof once again that Microsoft listens to its customers, but
> is completely clueless as to how to fix the problem properly. :-)
>
> Has someone hacked together a DLL which could allow NT to read
> and write and boot from an ext2 volume? I know of one that can
> be run from Win95 for readonly access, and the code for writing
> files on an ext2 volume is readily available (download any Linux
> kernel :-) ).
I saw an ext2 driver for NT once, but it came from a college-project
type web site, so I didn't trust it. I'm sure there are probably
a few others out there. It's not that hard to write file systems for
NT (that is, if you know how to write filesystems in the first place),
I guess there must just not be a lot of demand for it or something.
> I'm curious as to how well this will work. Bear in mind that there
> may be some DACL problems, but hey, NT can run on a FAT volume,
> so they can't be horrid..... :-)
Right, I bet security would just be disabled.
What's the point of "security" if it isn't DAC in the first place =P
-Chad
------------------------------
From: J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: NTFS Limitations
Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2001 05:30:34 GMT
Chad Myers wrote:
> "J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > I notice that once again, you carefully snipped my
> > reference to the major auto manufacturer website.
>
> Seeing as how you post half-facts and misrepresent the rest, I rarely
> see the point in posting your entire post. I find the first lie I can
> and expose it, the rest of your post is irrelevant after that.
Thank you for your criticism. It will be considered
with the appropriate degree of seriousness.
I think it's safe to say that we are worlds apart in
our thinking -
jjs
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: NTFS Limitations (Was: RE: Red hat becoming illegal?)
Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 22:09:13 -0800
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 04 Feb 2001 02:43:41 GMT,
Bob Hauck, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>On Sat, 3 Feb 2001 16:04:54 -0800, Jim Richardson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>
>> Chad, you can review the code yourself, the problems mentioned are
>> fixed...
>
>Don't get too carried away Jim. I really doubt that Chad is capable of
>reviewing any code not written in VBA. Your comment is true only in a
>theoretical sense.
>
>--
perhaps, but his claim needed to be slapped down. Pointing out that with
opensource, anyone can verify, is a good start.
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Subject: Re: The 130MByte text file
Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 22:16:35 -0800
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sat, 03 Feb 2001 22:46:31 -0500,
Aaron R. Kulkis, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> In article <95fbpa$h9$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.) wrote:
>> > Why on earth not? Right now, there are two X-sessions running on
>> > two different consoles on my home machine, and it is also clienting
>> > me a desktop here at work.
>>
>> Okay. I got RH6.1, so maybe that has something to do with it. Log in on
>> tty1 and startx, get X. Ctl-alt-f2 to get a new login, log in, startx,
>> get an error. The explanation that I got for this was that "you can't
>> have more than one X session at a time". What am I doing wrong?
>>
>
>Why would you even want to have multiple X sessions on the same monitor
>when you can simply run multiple virtual X-terminals?
well, I for one have used it to play around with various desktops and
windowmanagers. It's pretty easy to do, just
startx -- :1
and bingo...
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: NTFS Limitations
Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 22:18:53 -0800
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sat, 03 Feb 2001 19:48:17 GMT,
Chad Myers, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:s1gh59.s8b.ln@gd2zzx...
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> > So, with that, I ask you guys:
>> > 1. Why is Linux the most vulnerable web server platform?
>>
>> In 2000 Microsoft hit the ton with security bugs. A record. The worst single
>> application was IIS. You were saying...
>
>"hit the ton"?
>
>View attrition.org. Linux frequently beats NT+2K (combined) in number of
>defacements per month.
>
>-Chad
>
>
name a month in 2000 when this was true.
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: NTFS Limitations (Was: RE: Red hat becoming illegal?)
Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2001 08:26:45 +0200
"The Ghost In The Machine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Aaron R. Kulkis
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote
> on Thu, 01 Feb 2001 21:44:43 -0500
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >Champ Clark III wrote:
> >>
> >> In article <95bh0f$t75$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ayende Rahien wrote:
> >> >
> >> >"J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> >> Ayende Rahien wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > "J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> >> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > Is it true that windows 2000 finally got filesystem quotas
> >> >> > > somewhat similar to what Linux has had for years?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Yes.
> >> >> > Is it true that Linux finally got the SMP support that NT
> >> >> > had for years?
> >> >>
> >> >> Linux has had smp support since version 1.1.31.
> >> >
> >> >And it was *bad*.
> >> >
> >> >> That was ~1995.
> >> >
> >> >NT had it since 3.1 (from the start, that is).
> >>
> >> You still dodged something here. That was quota's that
> >> got this little thing going. I'll bet that quota'ing is in more
> >> use then say, hrmm.. Mulit-CPU's? Hell, Novell has quota's!
> >> VMS has had quotas for years! I can't even think of a *nix that
> >> doesn't have a quota'ing system for it...... What took so long?
> >
> >Microsoft--relearning mid-20th centuryt technology...in the 21st.
>
> Not only that, but making it "usable" for the masses by slapping
> on silly icons, pulldown menus that slowly vanish beautifully
> and/or animate from the pointer as the user selects a scascade item,
> windows with scrollbars, gadgets, rollover labels that change
> color as the mouse rolls over them (wow, psycho, man), and built-in
> richly-formatted help text files that tell one the bit that he
> knew already ("yes, I KNOW that's a toggle button with a label,
> you moronic program!").
You would *love* Mac OS X, then.
When you minimize something, it shrink and vanish like a genie. And there
are a lot of other eye-candy there to make your head hurt.
> Except that the RTF files are not standard HTML, TeX, or PDF,
> the vanishing pulldown menus and rollovers are useless gewgawery
> (although a well-designed pulldown can help in documenting),
> and the silly icons are just silly -- what *does* that floppy
> mean in Word, for example? How does one deduce that it means
> "save to disk"? How stupid is that??
Actually, you are supposed to learn it *once*, and from them on, you
recognize it, because it's used almost everywhere.
> I'm still holding out for soft links. Has Microsoft scheduled them yet?
Describe what you mean when you say soft links (my unix terminology is in
another language, and not very good to begin with).
I think that they did.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: NTFS Limitations (Was: RE: Red hat becoming illegal?)
Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2001 08:30:58 +0200
"The Ghost In The Machine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Chad Myers
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote
> on Sat, 03 Feb 2001 02:17:38 GMT
> <6TJe6.3506$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> >"Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:95ehmi$pgs$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> [snip]
>
> >> A> I don't want a user-level program to be able to do this. It has to
be
> >> Admin level access at the very least.
> >> B> AFAIK, there isn't NT defrag APIs, at least not on NT4, which is why
they
> >> licensed some one else code for the 2K defrager.
> >
> >Executive Software (makers of DiskKeeper) requested MS put cluster
mapping
> >and remapping APIs in the kernel to aid in defragmenting the disk.
> >
> >http://www.sysinternals.com/ntw2k/info/defrag.shtml
> >
> >FSCTL_GET_VOLUME_BITMAP
> >FSCTL_GET_RETRIEVAL_POINTERS
> >FSCTL_MOVE_FILE
> >FSCTL_READ_MFT_RECORD
> >
> >These were added as part of the NtFsControlFile native function.
>
> Proof once again that Microsoft listens to its customers, but
> is completely clueless as to how to fix the problem properly. :-)
>
> Has someone hacked together a DLL which could allow NT to read
> and write and boot from an ext2 volume? I know of one that can
> be run from Win95 for readonly access, and the code for writing
> files on an ext2 volume is readily available (download any Linux
> kernel :-) ).
It also work on NT, but (a *big* but) last time I used it, it wiped out the
FS when I tried a write operation.
> I'm curious as to how well this will work. Bear in mind that there
> may be some DACL problems, but hey, NT can run on a FAT volume,
> so they can't be horrid..... :-)
Well, there is a FS development kit for NT.
It cost quite a bit (1000$US), but I think that if you build something to
enable it to read/write you should be able to make NT boot from ext2
partition.
The problem might be with permissions. I don't know if you could explain to
NT how to use ext2 model of permissions, NTFS model is much tighter, and FAT
is non-existing.
So you might end up with ext2 but without permissions.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: NTFS Limitations (Was: RE: Red hat becoming illegal?)
Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2001 08:33:06 +0200
"Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:lw5f6.11949$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "The Ghost In The Machine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Chad Myers
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote
> > on Sat, 03 Feb 2001 02:17:38 GMT
> > <6TJe6.3506$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > >
> > >"Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > >news:95ehmi$pgs$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> > >> A> I don't want a user-level program to be able to do this. It has to
be
> > >> Admin level access at the very least.
> > >> B> AFAIK, there isn't NT defrag APIs, at least not on NT4, which is
why
> they
> > >> licensed some one else code for the 2K defrager.
> > >
> > >Executive Software (makers of DiskKeeper) requested MS put cluster
mapping
> > >and remapping APIs in the kernel to aid in defragmenting the disk.
> > >
> > >http://www.sysinternals.com/ntw2k/info/defrag.shtml
> > >
> > >FSCTL_GET_VOLUME_BITMAP
> > >FSCTL_GET_RETRIEVAL_POINTERS
> > >FSCTL_MOVE_FILE
> > >FSCTL_READ_MFT_RECORD
> > >
> > >These were added as part of the NtFsControlFile native function.
> >
> > Proof once again that Microsoft listens to its customers, but
> > is completely clueless as to how to fix the problem properly. :-)
> >
> > Has someone hacked together a DLL which could allow NT to read
> > and write and boot from an ext2 volume? I know of one that can
> > be run from Win95 for readonly access, and the code for writing
> > files on an ext2 volume is readily available (download any Linux
> > kernel :-) ).
>
> I saw an ext2 driver for NT once, but it came from a college-project
> type web site, so I didn't trust it. I'm sure there are probably
> a few others out there. It's not that hard to write file systems for
> NT (that is, if you know how to write filesystems in the first place),
> I guess there must just not be a lot of demand for it or something.
Native one? Or just a program that read/write to ext2?
BTW, do you know where I can find drivers for other FS other than
FAT/NTFS/HPFS for 2K? Preferably free, and preferably native ones. (I mean,
you install it, and this enable everything in the computer to read/write to
the FS.
> > I'm curious as to how well this will work. Bear in mind that there
> > may be some DACL problems, but hey, NT can run on a FAT volume,
> > so they can't be horrid..... :-)
>
> Right, I bet security would just be disabled.
>
> What's the point of "security" if it isn't DAC in the first place =P
*Any* security is better than no security.
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Sound a networks
Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2001 06:47:24 GMT
"Pete Goodwin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:upRe6.17675$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Tom Wilson wrote:
>
> > I don't know. I generally take the approach that if you want things
done
> > correctly you have to do them yourself. This goes for Linux
installations
> > too. Just grab tarballs and start compiling...You never fail doing
this.
>
> I'd rather it was done for me... sounds like Linux has a way to go with
> distributions.
To each his own, I guess. I'm a bit of a control freak when it comes to my
software/hardware. I personally prefer the roll-your-own approach to
things. As far as having a long way to go. It does, in the context of Joe
Average User. Hopefully, InstallShield's entry into the fray will help
things out as far as package management is concerned. Time will tell.
Mandrake used to be an excellent distro. They seem to have gone downhill
over the past few releases. I truly think the problem with this newest one
was rushing to get it out on the shelves. Some of the binary RPMS just
appear to be broken. Some are missing altogether. OTOH, their hardware
detection is excellent. Not a lot of post-install fiddling involved to get
things up. I know this wasn't the case with your dual NIC situation - I'm
still not sure what to think about it... As far as I know, you've already
ironed the problem out. I haven't had the time to follow the groups lately
so I don't know. (What did come of that, anyway?)
--
Tom Wilson
Sunbelt Software Solutions
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: NTFS Limitations (Was: RE: Red hat becoming illegal?)
Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2001 08:45:27 +0200
"The Ghost In The Machine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Ayende Rahien
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote
> on Fri, 2 Feb 2001 13:12:19 +0200
> <95e4s4$id5$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> >"David Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:95e2ua$251$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >>
> >> Chad Myers wrote in message ...
> >> >
> >> >"David Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> >news:95bv3o$3ga$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> >>
> >> >> Chad Myers wrote in message
> >> <0Wde6.602$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> >No, quotas have been around for NT for years.
> >> >> >Save the lies.
> >> >>
> >> >> I am curious about the disk quotas on NT - we have NT 4.0 Server at
the
> >> >> office, and I can find no mention of disk quotas anywhere in the
help
> >> files,
> >> >> or in any of the administrative tools. In fact, the only mention I
> >find
> >> of
> >> >> the word "quota" is that in order to use the SU program (a utility
to
> >let
> >> >> you change to another user in a command box - it is very limited,
but
> >> >> nonetheless essential for administrating NT - why you have to buy it
as
> >> part
> >> >> of the NT Resource kit is beyond me), a user has to have the
"Increase
> >> >> Quotas" account priviledge.
> >> >
> >> >There are very good 3rd party implementations of Quotas. He never said
> >that
> >> >they had to be built into the OS, he just said NT 4.0 doesn't have
> >quotas,
> >> >which is a lie. Win2K has them built in, that's the only difference.
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> So quota management is one of these few extra utilities that Linux has
but
> >> you have to buy third-party for NT? Or go for W2K, which is gradually
> >> catching up with the unix world in regards to these minor, extra
utilites.
> >>
> >> I am disappointed - I may have used quotas if they were available on NT
4
> >> (hidden functionality is not available - saying NT doesn't have quotas
is
> >> factually wrong but effectively true).
> >
> > Get used to it.
> >To count only unused features of NTFS alone:
> >Hard links
>
> Oh wow! Like Unix has had this for what, more than 2 decades now?
> (Anyone know how long Unix has had the 'ln' command?)
>
> Such technological sophistication; the Microsoft Engineers have
> really outdone themselves this time. I'm impressed. Not.
>
> Any word on when soft links will be implemented in the filesystem?
> (Never mind that *.lnk crap in Internet Explorer.)
>
> Even the Amiga OS had soft links at one point, as part of
> its filesystem -- and that was back in the late 80's!
NTFS had this ability from the start, AFAIK.
The problem that ln.exe is only available from the resource kit, and
frankly, I don't like it.
It took five minutes to assembled a hard link creator via UI (three APIs
calls, open file, save file as, create hard link).
> >Rephrase points
>
> I have no idea what this is. Is this similar to the Mac's HFS
> resource fork, or what?
No, resource fork is handled via streams.
Rephrase points are a little like hard links, but for directories.
It enable NTFS to mount HDs into NTFS volumes.
And let you create all sorts of neat stuff if you know how.
Basically, you tell the FS that when something access a folder, it should
call a function/program that you create, and that will handle the rest of
it.
> >Streams
>
> Wow! This is something Linux actually doesn't have.
> (Not that it would be that hard to put in; it's just that
> this is a System 5ism, and Linux is coming more from the BSD side
> of the philosophical aisle, if that makes much sense at all, as
> Linux doesn't have any BSD code, either, AFAIK, in its kernel.)
Actually, there was a talk about entering streams into Linux, it was dropped
because it's too much work.
Too many tools would need to be redesigned in order to support streams.
System 5ism?
How did BSD entered the discussion?
> >Three *very* useful features, rendered useless because there are either
no
> >API to manipulate them (in the case of streams) or no userland level
tools
> >to use them. (Not that it's that hard to create one, it's the principle
that
> >matter.)
>
> Erm, dumb question. How does NTFS implement something for an OS
> that doesn't have manipulation tools (API) for it?
There are (documented) APIs for hard links & rephrase points.
But the only documented way to enumerate file streams in BackUpRead(), very
inefficent way of doing it.
There is un-documented way to enumerate file streams, NtQueryFileinfo(),
which is much better, and probably how NT does it, but not much is known
about it.
I would have like it much better if you could enumerate streams the same you
do with registry subkey/values, via a *documented* API.
> I could see ext2 implementing an entry for, say, /dev/audio
> (major device #14), on systems which don't have a sound card -- but
> that's because everyone knows the major device number.
> One could also remove the 'ln' command and 'symlink()' and 'readlink()'
> from the kernel (that would take a bit of doing), and ext2 would still
> support soft links.
The situation today is that symlink() & readlink()'s equilent exist, but
there is no ln command.
> Color me slightly confused.
I'm not complaining about the lack of APIs, I complain about the lack of
user-land tools that uses them.
Frex, I create an empty file and enter 1 GB of info in a stream.
In explorer, cli, whatever you want, the file would appear as 0 bytes.
Not good.
Another example, I want to see how much streams a file has, I can't.
The annoying thing is that there is a MSDN article with a shell extention
that does it (& hard links), why couldn't they enter it into NTFS volumes?
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list by posting to comp.os.linux.advocacy.
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
