Slashdot Mirror
NTFS Support For OpenBSD
Dan writes "Julien Bordet has ported code from NetBSD to support NTFS4 and NTFS5 in OpenBSD-current. He has heavily tested read accesses to his Windows 2000 partition, and that has worked fine. Julien says that there is an existing port, but his port is new and adds NTFS5 support."
NTFS read-write support would be a VERY big deal. It would be one less way that Microsoft isolates its customers.
Well if you're going to say that, I've had NTFS 4/5 read/write support in Windows 2000 for about 3 years(NT4 sp6a has read/write support for NTFS 5 also), so I guess that makes Windows 2000 and NT4 at least 3 times better than Linux.
I just recently formatted an NTFS partition to Fat32 because I was sick of not being able to write to it.
Saying your OS is the best because more people use it is like saying MacDonalds make the best food
I don't see any references to writing.
I don't tihnk anyone can write to these damn things...
*shrug* basically, I don't see any reason to run a secure OS (openbsd) on the same machine as -blech- windows, so this has very little use (ie, moving a drive to another machine when the original machine can't read it, etc)
Buttsex.
You're a troll, openbsd has a completely different user target than netbsd.
No. That may have been why OpenBSD was created (hey, we've all got egos, right?) but if that were the only reason it would not have existed for very long. OpenBSD concentrates totally on security, at the expense of adding flashy features, resulting in a very secure OS.
To 90% of us, this is entirely pointless, since something like Linux (or even windows) is 'secure enough', but to those who actually have serious security needs OpenBSD is a godsend. By the same token NetBSD is pointless, since everyone uses x86, right? The 'One Size Fits All' OS is a myth.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
I was joking, and yes, migration hurts, I don't have any large scale backup solutions at home so moving 2 120 gig drives from Windows to FreeBSD (or anything else) is for most intents and purposes impossible, although it also stands that Windows 2000 is at least 3 times better for me than Linux (or my preferred FreeBSD) for what I use it for even if I made that comment in jest.
NTFS is a modern, mature, stable, fully journalled file system. It's got POSIX compliance, and it's got room built in for improvement. It also handles sparse files very nicely. In fact, even Windows NT 4 can use NTFS 3.1 (aka NTFS5) when upgraded to SP4 (ntfs.sys is replaced).
Few people really know what they're talking about when they discuss NTFS. Did you know it supports hard linking? Did you know it's got a change journal? Did you know it can encrypt and decrypt files on the fly for instant access? NTFS pushes security, and part of security is security through obscurity. No one can boot Knoppix and overwrite your SAM - they can format the drive, but they can't CHANGE your system (presuming then, that you could always restore your data).
Anyway, leave it to Slashdot to find some jerk who says NTFS is crap because it's a Microsoft product.
I'm not saying NTFS is the end all of file systems, but don't trash it. It's a very nice product, and, unlike reiser, ext3, and UFS2, it's proven and widely deployed.
More on NTFS
NTFS has been One of the most frustrating filesystems to get into read write mode....Linux kernels 2.4.21 has read write capability in it, however, in some circumstances its broken. Linux kernels 2.5.30 have working read write support in them. And the linux 2.6.x kernels promise stable, and fast read write support.
So it quite frustrating, but it is slowly coming along. And once it is out for linux...I'm sure it will be in the BSD kernel quickly...in fact some of the techniques for NTFS read support came from netBSD. So read/write support isnt far off
You're right, but that's not a problem with NTFS. That's a problem with XP, of which there are MANY.
I agree, NTFS isn't by any stretch a panacea, but it is worthy of some praise - certainly as much as the current iterations of reiserfs and ext3.
It's depressing when the only computer in the house that needs a fsck on power failure is the OpenBSD one.
I am definitely not one of those, but it doesn't take much imagination to think of someone who might want that.
I'll have to do some research. I don't believe for one second that there are more ext3 or resier deployments that NTFS. NTFS has been around since at least 1996 or earlier - virtually every Windows server runs it.
I bet most Linux servers still use ext2. FreeBSD uses UFS. Novell uses NWFS. AIX uses JFS and IRIX uses XFS. reiser and ext3 are still babies comparitively.
Read/(write) access to none native filesystems such as NTFS is only relevant for dual boot systems, where it may be nice to access your NTFS partition while booted into *BSD or Linux.
But "real" systems are no dual boot systems. So you don't need it. Hardly find NTFS on floppies or CD-R or on tape. OK maybe for a hotswappable (scsi) harddisk it might have a use, but that is the only serious thing I can think of.
All other interoperability between filesystems goes via network filesystems, be it SMB, NFS, AFS, DFS or whatever. Those are the ones you need. A good and free implementation of NFS for NT might be nice, or Samba keeping up with ever changing Windows fileservers. For real use you need a directory service across platforms as well (NIS+ on windows, active directory on UNIX).
Why does openbsd exist again? Oh yeah, because Theo couldn't get his sparc patches accepted by the port maintainer. It's really odd that Theo has those emails up on his web site; they're not particularly flattering.
Here's why people attempt to knock Theo down: They desperately wish that they were like him.
Theo speaks his mind. He's true to himself. He doesn't say what others want to hear; he says what should be said. In short, he's honest and he doesn't play politics and that tends to offend people. So be it.
We only live life once. Anyone can be a yes man. People who have soul, who are naturally royal stand out and rise above all the bullshit in the world. Cloth them in rags and they still command respect, they still remain the subject of envy. Theo is one of these people. I am another one. You wish you were too. Get over it.