On Wed, 17 Jan 2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This effects many other distributions and people often ask what's happening.
Adam Cecile, Mertens Florent and me offered to help the Debian maintainer,
and Flo sent an LSB compliant FUSE init file but the maintainer doesn't
reply repeated
Hi,
On Tue, 16 Jan 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It was a good idea to support older fuse kernel modules, but it still
requires new fuse user space tools to compile. Is it possible to
compile/use with fuse 2.5.3 too? Currently there is a check for 2.6.0+
in the configure script.
Correct.
On Sun, 3 Dec 2006, David [iso-8859-15] Martínez Moreno wrote:
El domingo, 3 de diciembre de 2006 11:36, Anton Altaparmakov escribió:
Thank you very much, guys. What should we do know, apply the two-line
patch from Szaka to 1.13.1, wait for 1.14, backport any other change...?
On Sun, 3 Dec 2006, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
On Sun, 3 Dec 2006, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
Sorry I didn't explain myself better. My patch was only for Vista.
Disagree. Your patch is fine for all NTFS volumes. There is no need to
set the mounted on NT4 bit on any volume during what
Hi Andree,
On Sun, 3 Dec 2006, Andree Leidenfrost wrote:
I've tested and all looks well! When booting into Vista after a resize,
chkdsk is started and after another reboot the system starts as usual.
You are a star
Thanks for the testing but I object the last sentence because I think
On Sat, 2 Dec 2006, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
Apparently Vista refuses to boot if an NTFS volume was mounted on
NT4 earlier. This is also what ntfsresize lied to trick Windows
to be compatible with itself.
Could you please try the below patch against ntfsprogs 1.13.1 that the
theory
El sábado, 2 de diciembre de 2006 20:44, Frans Pop escribió:
On Saturday 02 December 2006 14:36, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
I put a statically linked version here to ease the testing.
http://www.ntfs-3g.org/ntfsresize-1.13.1.1.tgz
This version makes Vista happy too. After
Hi,
Apparently Vista refuses to boot if an NTFS volume was mounted on
NT4 earlier. This is also what ntfsresize lied to trick Windows
to be compatible with itself.
Could you please try the below patch against ntfsprogs 1.13.1 that the
theory is correct? Thank you.
Szaka
---
On Thu, 30 Nov 2006, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
Szaka wrote: pointless to empty journal if clean...
It is NOT pointless to empty.
It depends on how journaling works, on which we disagree. It's useless to
explain the consequences if you're right because I'm obviously aware of it.
You
On Thu, 30 Nov 2006, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
I read the code and it does it. I do not believe in sniffing as you put
it. That is useless as you never know what/why the software is doing
something. The code itself shows exactly what happens. I prefer to stick
with that.
I prefer
On Thu, 30 Nov 2006, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
I have not the faintest idea what was wrong before. [...] to my surprise
it now made Vista work. Why - no idea, and I could not care less.
So, you have no idea of
- what was wrong before
- why ntfsresize works on your Vista now
On Thu, 30 Nov 2006, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
I understand the impact 100% which is why my patch is so big. It had to
touch a lot of utilities to adapt for the changed libntfs behaviour.
The impact to resizing any kind of NTFS. There are many special cases and
ntfsresize works quite
On Tue, 28 Nov 2006, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
On Tue, 28 Nov 2006, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
I didn't have time to check the patches yet but wasn't the Vista problem due
to a bug in libntfs and not because of ntfsresize?
The problem is that with my first patch which does not turn
On Tue, 28 Nov 2006, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
Thank you for persisting with this.
Yes, thank you Frans and Andree for your help. We definitely found
something.
I have now looked at the code and you are right it does not do the same
thing. This is because when Yura ported my $LogFile
On Tue, 28 Nov 2006, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
Ok, I just committed some more fixes to ntfsresize. It never actually
unmounted the volume, just exited which was very rude of it!
It's intentionally not umounted. Ntfsresize __rewrites__ NTFS and it's
dangerous to umount because that could
On Tue, 28 Nov 2006, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
It's intentionally not umounted. Ntfsresize __rewrites__ NTFS and it's
dangerous to umount because that could interfer, corrupt or destroy the
resized, consistent NTFS.
Do you not keep the ntfs_volume of the mount consistent with your
On Tue, 28 Nov 2006, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
On Tue, 2006-11-28 at 13:08 +0100, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
There are two NTFS during resizing. The original and the resized. When
the resizing is over then the latter is consistent and the old one is
irrelevant. ntfsresize doesn't work
On Tue, 28 Nov 2006, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
On Tue, 2006-11-28 at 14:20 +0100, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
relocate_inodes(), relocate_inode(), especially the $MFT part. There is a
strict order in what and when is relocated. At some point ntfs_volume is
mostly used only for reading
On Sun, 26 Nov 2006, Frans Pop wrote:
On Sunday 26 November 2006 02:13, you wrote:
Could you please also test that whether Vista boots if you remove
/pagefile.sys after ntfsresize? You can use ntfs-3g for this, it's in
Debian unstable. Usage: http://www.ntfs-3g.org/index.html#usage
Or
On Sat, 25 Nov 2006, Frans Pop wrote:
I've stopped after the Win2k chkdsk as that turned out to be sufficient to
make Vista boot again, so running the Vista repair is unnecessary!
The md5sum check after running chkdsk showed only /pagefile.sys deleted.
Yes, there isn't really anything
Hi,
Thanks for your help and the images.
On Sat, 25 Nov 2006, Frans Pop wrote:
I hope the info available now will be sufficient to track down the
problem. If not, I could repeat the procedure and also generate an image
after running the Windows 2000 chkdsk.
Please. That could be very
Hi,
Could you please try this after running ntfsresize and before booting
Vista:
dd if=PARTITION bs=512 count=1 | dd of=PARTITION seek=LAST_SECTOR
where LAST_SECTOR is the last sector on PARTITION. It can be calculated
by running
sfdisk -d DISK | grep PARTITION
and then by
On Thu, 23 Nov 2006, Frans Pop wrote:
I've tried this in vmware. Apparently you should be able to use the Vista
installer's Recovery Environment [1] to run chkdsk.
Unfortunately it seems that the Vista installer dislikes what ntfsresize
has done so much that that also fails to boot!
It's
On Thu, 23 Nov 2006, Frans Pop wrote:
On Thursday 23 November 2006 00:27, Szaka wrote:
It's possible that it checks the boot sector for changes, e.g. against
viruses, rootkits, etc.
I still don't see why it should affect booting the _installer_.
I think this is a beta2 bug which was
On Sun, 12 Nov 2006, Andree Leidenfrost wrote:
On Sat, 2006-11-11 at 21:43 +0200, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
GParted was used with Vista RC1 in the below article. Same hang but chkdsk
fixed the boot problem:
http://opensource.apress.com/article/163/taking-a-look-at-vista-part-iii
Hi,
On Sun, 12 Nov 2006, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
On Sun, 12 Nov 2006, Andree Leidenfrost wrote:
The problem for me is how to run chkdsk after the resize. If you can tell
me how I'll do it.
I think, your only chance is Google.
...
But I would still focus only on the latest Vista
Hi,
On Sat, 11 Nov 2006, Andree Leidenfrost wrote:
I had another look and used F6-F8-Safe Mode with Command Prompt. In
the attached screenshot you can see that it stops after it loaded
crcdisk.sys.
Google says other people experience the same.
Thanks, I've checked some Google posts.
On Sat, 11 Nov 2006, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote:
Perhaps try replacing ntdetect.com and ntldr with the versions that came
with an earlier Vista beta? For reference see:
Hi,
Vista went gold. Unfortunately nobody could test the problem with the latest
Vista BETA, hence we don't know if the problem still exists or Microsoft
fixed it.
Thanks to all who did everything he could.
On Thu, 9 Nov 2006, Frans Pop wrote:
No, but I'm surprised that data partitions
[Frans: Could you please keep all interested parties CC'd? They don't get
your emails and I must add Andree and linux-ntfs-dev manually every time.
Thanks.]
On Thu, 9 Nov 2006, Frans Pop wrote:
On Thursday 09 November 2006 09:03, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
Andree confirmed that it's true
Hi,
On Wed, 8 Nov 2006, Andree Leidenfrost wrote:
Thanks a lot for your response!
Thanks for yours too! :)
Ok, I've reinstalled and created a 10GB E: drive in Vista after that.
Surprisingly enough (at least to me), after reducing the size by 1MB
following your original instructions,
On Wed, 8 Nov 2006, Frans Pop wrote:
On Sunday 05 November 2006 23:57, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
So, it seems we should plan and implement denial of the resizing for
Vista, asap. This is not so bad, because Vista started to include a
non-destructive resizer.
Well, it is a pity that we
Hi Andree,
On Sun, 5 Nov 2006, Andree Leidenfrost wrote:
I have made a Vista partition 1MB smaller as per your instructions. I
can confirm that Vista does not boot anymore after this. Rather it hangs
on the black screen with the 'golden' progress bar with 'C 2006
Microsoft Corporation. All
Hi,
Here is the promised summary. So far, it looks promising :)
Success:0
Failure:0
I've also asked help now on the ntfsresize faq page. 5000-7000 visitors a
week. Let's see if they can help, I'll let you know.
Szaka
On Sat, 28 Oct 2006, Szakacsits
Please feel free to remove the offending 'args = NULL;' lines. It's part
of a dead, unused, broken functionality. It will be fixed properly in the
next ntfs-3g release.
Hi. Attached is the complete ntfs-3g fix. Compile tested only on x86.
Thanks,
SzakaIndex:
Hi,
Linux had no problem with Vista Beta NTFS support in the past but there is
indication that this may have changed with the latest Vista Beta releases.
I would like to ask people's help to confirm or refute this situation.
Please, anybody who has the possibility, follow the below
On Sat, 28 Oct 2006, Frans Pop wrote:
On Saturday 28 October 2006 18:25, you wrote:
5. Reboot into Vista. You must see the scheduled chkdsk running after
which Vista should either continue booting fine (data partition)
or automatically initiate a reboot of the computer (system
Hi,
Please feel free to remove the offending 'args = NULL;' lines. It's part of
a dead, unused, broken functionality. It will be fixed properly in the
next ntfs-3g release.
Thank you,
Szaka
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe.
On Fri, 6 Oct 2006, Adam [iso-8859-1] C?cile (Le_Vert) wrote:
Okay i386, amd64 (unofficial) supported. Great. What's about 32 bits
little-endian other arches, I mean arm and mipsel ? Any feedbacks ?
Arm and hppa has fuse problems. No more arch related info yet.
I can give you ssh root
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006, Frans Pop wrote:
You can also safely reboot into Vista after ntfsresize, no need to do
the partitioning at the same time. If Vista boots then it's not
ntfsresize problem, if it doesn't then it's ntfsresize problem.
I'm sorry, but I get exactly the same error if I do
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006, Frans Pop wrote:
You can also safely reboot into Vista after ntfsresize, no need to do
the partitioning at the same time. If Vista boots then it's not
ntfsresize problem, if it doesn't then it's ntfsresize problem
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006, Frans Pop wrote:
You can also safely reboot into Vista after ntfsresize, no need to do
the partitioning at the same time. If Vista boots then it's not
ntfsresize
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006, Frans Pop wrote:
Yes, I have done previous tests using 1.13.1 too, indeed with no
difference in behavior. I have just upgraded my test system from etch to
sid, so all my following tests will use 1.13.1 again.
Ok, thanks.
Yes, all my previous tests have been on real
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006, Frans Pop wrote:
On Monday 21 August 2006 16:40, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
If a checksum doesn't match (except a few metadata files) then you've
found an ntfsresize problem.
Attached is the result of the md5sum check straight after running
ntfsresize (failures only
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006, Frans Pop wrote:
On Monday 21 August 2006 16:40, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
If a checksum doesn't match (except a few metadata files) then you've
found an ntfsresize problem.
Attached is the result of the md5sum
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006, Frans Pop wrote:
On Monday 21 August 2006 16:40, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
If a checksum doesn't match (except a few metadata files) then you've
found an ntfsresize problem.
Attached is the result of the md5sum check straight after running
ntfsresize (failures only
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006, Frans Pop wrote:
Are the files the same for which the checksums differ if you resize
again at the exact same size?
Or do you mean for me to retry again starting from the situation _before_
resizing?
Yes. If it's repeatable then we could exclude that you have a
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006, Frans Pop wrote:
On Monday 21 August 2006 19:31, you wrote:
Would it be possible to send the vista metadata image
Available from: http://people.debian.org/~fjp/ntfsmeta.img.bz2
and tell us at what size you resize? Thanks.
Mostly at 9GB but 12GB also fails.
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006, Frans Pop wrote:
On Monday 21 August 2006 19:31, you wrote:
Would it be possible to send the vista metadata image
Available from: http://people.debian.org/~fjp/ntfsmeta.img.bz2
and tell us at what size you
Hi,
Sorry, I was away and didn't have time yet to answer your former ntfsresize
emails (afair, you also found the solution yourself which is in the manual
and at end of the ntfsresize output).
On Sun, 13 Aug 2006, Frans Pop wrote:
- Use fdisk in sector mode to resize the partition to ~10GB.
On Fri, 14 Jul 2006, David [iso-8859-1] Mart?nez Moreno wrote:
El mi?rcoles, 1 de febrero de 2006 06:31, Ross Boylan escribi?:
On Tue, Jan 31, 2006 at 02:28:35PM +0100, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
[...]
Hello, Ross. I am packaging the just released 1.13.1 version of
ntfsprogs
51 matches
Mail list logo
