| Autor |
Nachricht |
|
|
Titel: Captive NTFS versus NTFS-3G?
 Verfasst am: 23.08.2006, 14:43 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 16. Mar 2005
Beiträge: 219
|
|
I've noticed a few posts about NTFS-3G lately, and it looks like some distros like Puppy and Slax (RC just out yesterday), are now including it, and I see how to install it was added to the Wiki here.
Yet, Kanotix 2005-04 makes it easy to use Captive NTFS.
Wouldn't it be the safer choice, since it's using the drivers already on my PC, which has a legal copy of XP? Or, because of the way it's iimplemented would it be more likely to have issues?
What are the pros and cons of both?
Thanks. |
_________________
Jim C.
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Titel: RE: Captive NTFS versus NTFS-3G?
Verfasst am: 23.08.2006, 16:00 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 16. Aug 2004
Beiträge: 1905
|
|
| captive is basically unmaintained and suffers from severe bugs that do lead to data corruption, I won't trust ntfs-3g with valuable data either but it's at least under heavy development and has responsive upstream support (and it seems to "work"). Besides that, captive has been removed from kanotix since early CeBIT RCs. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 23.08.2006, 16:21 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 16. Mar 2005
Beiträge: 219
|
|
Thanks. Will NTFS-3G work OK with 2005-04 (understanding that it's still experimental and could cause problems)?
I probably won't write to my NTFS partition deliberately.
But, if I'm using Windows based tools like Picasa under Wine to scan my NTFS partition for images, I don't want to risk how it may be writing image indexes to folders it may read (it does this with the Windows version, and I don't know how they implmented their Linux version under Wine). So, I'd like to have a layer of protection that may help prevent any corruption to the NTFS partition for any Windows applications running under Wine that may ttry to write to it. |
_________________
Jim C.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 24.08.2006, 00:10 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 09. Jan 2006
Beiträge: 1720
|
|
| Reading ntfs does allways function. Wine creates the picture index not at folder from where the pic's came, but in its own folder. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 24.08.2006, 01:00 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 16. Mar 2005
Beiträge: 219
|
|
|
schnorrer hat folgendes geschrieben::
Reading ntfs does allways function. Wine creates the picture index not at folder from where the pic's came, but in its own folder.
Not in Windows.
Perhaps index is the wrong name (it may have a separate index that it creates for other things).
Picasa creates a separate file named picasa.ini in *every* folder that it reads that you give it access to that contains images that you modify with it (and you don't need to tell it to save any changes when it writes this data). In other words, move a slider for anything when you're viewing an image, it writes that change to this file).
It doesn't actually modify the original images. Instead, it stores the changes you make to an image in this picasa.ini file (which is only a text file).
Here is an example of what it stores in this file (I only copied a few images worth). I've got lots of these files on my NTFS partition, since I create a new folder for each date I upload to my PC (for example, c:\photos\20060715
[PICT4919.JPG]
filters=fill=1,0.457944;autolight=1;crop=1,393,0,2975,1720;
backuphash=37136
crop=rect(393 0 2975 1720)
[PICT4921.JPG]
rotate=rotate(1)
backuphash=2742
[image136.JPG]
rotate=rotate(1)
backuphash=53143
My Picasa is setup to scan c:\photos and all of it's subfolders. So, when I add a new folder and restart Picasa, the images are pulled in.
Then, any changes I make to images are stored in the picasa.ini file located in the same folder as the images I'm changing (and only images that have been changed in some way are added to it, so that Picasa knows how to apply the same changes to the image you see).
I like this approach since it allows me to quickly browse through images and make "quick and dirty" crops, etc. Then, if I want to do something with better tools, I can use the "export" function (which then applies the changes it stores in this .ini file to an image that is exported to a folder you choose), and I don't actually make any changes to the original image until I export them.
Now, that's the Windows Picasa behavior. How does it store these changes for files you modify in Linux? I don't know. lol
Maybe that was part of the enhancements they made to it (it may be have been more than just getting it to run under Wine). Or, maybe they didn't assume that someone would want to view and make changes to images located on an NTFS partition from within Linux.
Of course, if I don't allow write access to the partition, it can't write these files (but, then I may not be able to use it to make visible changes to images on my NTFS partition without this access). I haven't tested it enough to see yet. |
_________________
Jim C.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 24.08.2006, 10:11 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 05. Okt 2004
Beiträge: 2069
Wohnort: w3
|
|
You still prefer Windows, trust more in Windows applications and Windows file systems. Your NTFS partition is a holy grail and you don't wan't anything from outside to write to it. That's ok, nobody here will critizise you because of that. Other might prefer their MacOS, which is fine, too.
But why then do you even think about using an - optional - read/write driver for NTFS, which is still in experimental state? And why is your first idea of using it again a Windows application (just ported via Wine)?
So, if you can't afford a separated machine for making your Linux experiments, just don't even mount your NTFS partitions at all. Set them to "noauto" in your /etc/fstab and just use Linux partitions with Linux. And start learning and using Linux applications - you might even consider to follow the open source idea and contribute to the development of Linux applications (writing documentations, beta testing and bug reporting, creating art work, donating photos for web site decoration, ....).
Picasa is the most un-needed Wine port to Linux - there are several mature native Linux applications around doing the same thing in same or better quality/speed (Kuickshow, digiKam, Gwenview, and several others). Picasa on Linux is nothing more than a marketing trick by Google. And please, don't start again the "but it does this&that that way, which is the better way, because I am used to this way ...". We know that already - Linux applications work different to Windows applications, because Linux is very different. If you want to use Linux, get used to the different way - the Linux way.
Greetings,
Chris |
_________________
"An operating system must operate."
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 24.08.2006, 18:11 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 24. Jun 2006
Beiträge: 90
Wohnort: Muppet Theater
|
|
I don't think he was trying to say the 'windows way' is better. I think he only meant that he likes what picasa does. He is, however, worried that it will try to write to his NTFS partition and wreck it, based on how he knows the program behaves in windows.
So, the question he really needs answered in order to feel warm and fuzzy is this:
is there any way a program could write to a partition that has been mounted as read only?
My suggestion would be to look for a linux app with equivalent behavior before relying on things through wine. Check out the things Chris suggested. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 25.08.2006, 02:30 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 13. Mai 2005
Beiträge: 732
Wohnort: Texas
|
|
|
UncleDeadley hat folgendes geschrieben::
So, the question he really needs answered in order to feel warm and fuzzy is this:
is there any way a program could write to a partition that has been mounted as read only?
No. |
_________________
Always acknowledge a fault. This will throw those in authority off their guard and give you an opportunity to commit more.
Mark Twain
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 25.08.2006, 06:50 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 16. Mar 2005
Beiträge: 219
|
|
|
slam hat folgendes geschrieben::
You still prefer Windows, trust more in Windows applications and Windows file systems. Your NTFS partition is a holy grail and you don't wan't anything from outside to write to it. That's ok, nobody here will critizise you because of that. Other might prefer their MacOS, which is fine, too.
Holy Grail? It's a file system. I just want to make sure I don't corrupt it if something I use does need to write to it, since even the readme file that comes with Kanotix 2005-04 (which I started trying again yesterday) warns about the need for Captive NTFS.
But, since I've been noticing information about NTFS-3G lately (in posts here, showing up in other Distros), I wanted to find out which one was safer. It looks like NTFS-3G is the favored choice now.
If I wasn't trying to find an alternative to Windows, I wouldn't be spending so much time with Linux distros.
I don't like the direction Microsoft has been going in (for a long time now).
I also don't like what some of the oil companies do.
But, I'm not going to quit buying gasoline and walk instead of driving.
If you want to take the approach that it's either all one way or the other with Operating Systems and software, fine. That's your choice.
I think I'll continue to use some of my existing tools, while taking the time to research new ones and learn them.
FWIW, I've been spending a lot more time in Linux lately versus Windows, not that I should need to try and justify why I want to spend more time in one versus another.
Zitat:
And why is your first idea of using it again a Windows application (just ported via Wine)?
I use the tools that work best for me. If you don't want to use a tool designed for Windows originally, fine, then don't.
I've found that Picasa is a pretty darn good browing tool under Windows for my needs.
I can browse a lot of folders by scrolling up or down, viewing all of the images in multiple folders as they scroll past, without the need to select a specific folder to look for an image in. Most other image browsing tools don't work that way, Windows or Linux.
Picasa works well enough for that purpose (finding images simply by browing through them) without the need for complex searches based on IPTC tags or databases for my needs (at least under Windows).
I can also do fast test crops, rotations, etc, without actually modifying the original images, and these changes show up when browsing to help me decide what images I'm going to spend more time with using more sophisticated tools.
Unfortunately, under Linux, it doesn't appear to work as well..
tt's a dog under Linux from what I can see from my testing today from a performance perspective.
So, it doesn't look like it was a particularly good candidate for running under Linux that way for someone with as many images as I have, and the way I use this tool (which may be very different than the way someone else uses it).
Now, that could also be the way Linux is working readiing from my NTFS partition versus the speed of Picasa under Wine. I'd need to move some images over to another paritition to give it a fair workout (and I just might do that).
Am I going to try Linux alternatives? Sure I am. I already have been trying some of them.
But, what's the big deal about seeing how well it works under Linux browing against my files that are now on an NTFS partition?
No, forget that question. I think I already see how you feel about it, baseed on previous responses. 
For that matter, I may even write some applications that I want to run under Wine to read and write to files on an NTFS partition.
Why?
It's much easier for me to do that, versus trying to learn to do the same thing for Linux. I developed applications for both DOS and Windows for a long time (and got paid well for it, if that makes me evil or something). 
I'm not sure I understand how this entire free software thiing works yet.
But, I don't share your passion for it, at least not now.
Zitat:
And start learning and using Linux applications - you might even consider to follow the open source idea and contribute to the development of Linux applications (writing documentations, beta testing and bug reporting, creating art work, donating photos for web site decoration, ....).
Actually, I do my part to help out in some areas related to open source.
For example, not long ago, I wrote an application that stripped out headers from raw files to send to a developer that works on decoding them in a popular program that source code is used from by many graphics applications.
This was a rather unique problem that needed solving, and due to space/transfer restrictions, headers only with camera settings was a better way to go due to the unusual number of images needed to solve a problem caused by a certain camera manufacturer.
I wrote a DOS application to strip them out of images (because that's easier for me with my skill set), complete with a nice user interface for entering the image information and a database to store the info about the headers, with information on White Balance and other settings being looked at, generating a report of the camera settings associated with each header for further analysis later (so that it could be used by someone that didn't normally run on DOS or Windows).
What difference did it make? I was only concerned about getting the headers and camera settings to someone, not what platform I was using to get that info with.
In other cases, I've helped out by sending entire image files to developers working on free software you'll find running under Linux.
Zitat:
Picasa is the most un-needed Wine port to Linux - there are several mature native Linux applications around doing the same thing in same or better quality/speed (Kuickshow, digiKam, Gwenview, and several others).
And, I've been trying some of them. It looks like digiKam won't be too bad as a browser (and it's got some really nice features for basic editing, too).
Do I think it works as well as Picasa under Windows for browing through a lot of images?
To be frank, No, I don't, and I'd say the same thing if it was a Windows application. It does a lot of other things better, but I use Picasa mainly as a browing tool.
If I use digiKam it will me longer to get a point where I use a more a more serious tool to do the rest of my editing in compared to using a tool like Picasa under Windows, and it also has no way to save changes that don't impact the original image. For my current workflow, it will slow me down.
Can I change my workflow? Sure, anyone can.
Zitat:
Picasa on Linux is nothing more than a marketing trick by Google. And please, don't start again the "but it does this&that that way, which is the better way, because I am used to this way ...". We know that already - Linux applications work different to Windows applications, because Linux is very different.
Linux way? Work Differently?
Someone could just as easily design Linux applications that browse images in a similar manner. It's not really a Windows versus Linux issue.
I'm looking at the functionality of the tools, for how I use them, versus the operating system they are running on. |
_________________
Jim C.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 25.08.2006, 08:41 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 12. Mar 2005
Beiträge: 1005
|
|
|
Zitat:
I'm looking at the functionality of the tools, for how I use them, versus the operating system they are running on.
I don't think this is the case, I think you are looking for a certain type of logic that results in a certain type of functionality. That's what it looks like to me anyway. If you explore the tools you have here you will find different things, different logics behind them, and maybe those don't work for you. If they don't, they don't.
Stuff in wine just doesn't work very well. I set up some of my favorite windows apps when I switched, thinking I really needed them, but after a while, with one exception, the awesome thotor, which runs great in wine, I just got sick of all those little wine glitches, where the stuff almost works right, but not quite.
Digikam, when I first saw it, amazed, me, I thought it was great, a fantastic tool. Gwenview is nice too, a slightly different take on the matter. If you only used one of these tools, you'd soon forget about picassa, which I've never even bothered looking at.
I got tired of MS stuff, so I stopped dealing with it, and it's a very good change. I still have to use some stuff for some reasons, but I just consider that a temporary thing, only happening because I still don't have the OpenSource solutions running. But that's all it is. I don't look to duplicate the exact functionality I've gotten used to, I just want to have the ability to do what I need to do, if it's done in a different way, that's fine with me.
Re Oil, yes, if you think it's a bad way to go, don't drive, it's easy not driving, unless you tie yourself into a lifestyle where, magically, you have to drive. But don't make a mistake about that, that was and is your choice, so obviously you dont' think it's that bad, just a little bad. It's the same with proprietary software. If you want that lifestye, then you may have to accept the parts that you say you don't like, if you don't, then you'll have to accept another set of parts you may not like, like apps not doing quite what you exactly need or are used to.
That's how it goes. But the one thing that probably won't happen any time in the near future is that the two will both lose the things you may not like about them. I can see the problems in the higher end graphics area, but that's really something you just have to check out and see if you can work within, if you can't, fine, doesn't matter. But picassa, just dump that stuff and spend the time learning the linux tools, they are fine. If they don't work for you, check back in a year, and things will be at a different stage. It doesn't matter, the world will still spin around much as it's doing today.
You are clearly smart enough to know what you need, and you clearly do not really understand open source, although I believe you are to some degree trying. It can take years to understand it, the more of those years you spend tying yourself into proprietary solutions, of course, the more locked in you become. That's just how it is, many so called 'web developers' for example couldn't dream of working without dreamweaver, even though you dont need a thing that junk offers to run the biggest or smallest website in the world. That's just how it goes, makes no difference. The way for a web developer to free themselves from that trap is simple: learn how to code. I dont' know the corresponding things for images, maybe there is none, maybe there is.
The simple point slam is making here is that worrying about writing to ntfs only happens when you tie yourself into using ntfs. After I realized kanotix was going to work very well for me, the first thing I did was go to my windows data partitions, reformat them with ext3, install ex2 win drivers for the rare times I boot into windows, and leave it at that. The ntfs problems are solved not by continuously playing the dual boot game, they are solved by not dual booting. To me dual booting is pointless, if I can't get one OS to do what I want, then there's a problem. I learned how to work with windows, and now I'm learning how to work with linux, and I'd never learn if I had kept giving up on finding linux solutions.
It might be different for you, maybe os x will work for you, my guess is it would. Or maybe you have to use windows, since you seem to either need or have some extra attachment to certain things you can do there. If you need them and can't duplicate them, then why torture yourself? If it's just habits which you can't break, you'll have to make the decision to do what ti takes to break them.
And by all means, please read more of the real stuff on open source / free software. If something about those ideas dont' grab you inside at some level, then why on earth are you spending time on it? |
_________________
Read more on dist-upgrades using du-fixes-h2.sh script.
New: rdiff-backup script
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 25.08.2006, 16:50 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 16. Mar 2005
Beiträge: 219
|
|
|
h2 hat folgendes geschrieben::
Zitat:
I'm looking at the functionality of the tools, for how I use them, versus the operating system they are running on.
I don't think this is the case, I think you are looking for a certain type of logic that results in a certain type of functionality. That's what it looks like to me anyway. If you explore the tools you have here you will find different things, different logics behind them, and maybe those don't work for you. If they don't, they don't.
That is what I mean. But, what does that have to do with what platform an application was written for?
Heck, I don't even like Picasa that much, except as a good browsing tool that lets me easily look through a lot of images located in multiple folders, without the need to look at a specific folder, while doing some "quick and dirty" crops and simple edits to see what images I may want to use for something else.
But, it's a neat tool for that purpose.
Do I have to use it? No. I got along just fine without it for a long time, and I could get along without it now if I needed to. Heck, the first time I loaded it, I uninstalled it. But, I tried it again later and decided it was a neat browsing tool.
But, I've got that choice.
What bothers me, is that the attitudes I see on some of the Linux forums are almost religious in nature.
Zitat:
Stuff in wine just doesn't work very well. I set up some of my favorite windows apps when I switched, thinking I really needed them, but after a while, with one exception, the awesome thotor, which runs great in wine, I just got sick of all those little wine glitches, where the stuff almost works right, but not quite.
Actually, some things seem to run fine in Wine. I haven't done any scientific testing in controlled conditions. But, I get the feeling that some apps I've tried actually run faster under Wine compared to XP. That could be all of the junk I've got trying to protect my XP install from viruses, spyware, etc., too.
Zitat:
Digikam, when I first saw it, amazed, me, I thought it was great, a fantastic tool. Gwenview is nice too, a slightly different take on the matter. If you only used one of these tools, you'd soon forget about picassa, which I've never even bothered looking at.
I've tried it and I think Digikam is a pretty neat tool, too. It won't let me browse images where I can see images from multiple folders in a single view by scrolling through them. It won't let me make quick and dirty changes that don't impact the original images. But, it looks like it would make a pretty good tool for many things and it's probably all many users would need.
That's why I said this in my last post:
Zitat:
It does a lot of other things better, but I use Picasa mainly as a browing tool.
Heck, in a recent post in an old hread at Steve's Digicams I mentioned it, where we (Kalypso, the other moderator there) were "beating up on Microsoft" a bit (I can get away with that since I'm a moderator there). lol
Zitat:
Digikam (a popular tool for basic browsing and Image Editing for Linux) just went to 16 bit editing with their newest release, and all plugins were ported to 16 bit, and color management is now supported, too. I used this tool last night to do some noise reduction, sharpening, etc. on a few photos and it seems to work quite well.
http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/view ... p?id=41894
I use lots of different tools, depending on what I'm trying to accomplish, and which one I think may work best for a given task (taking workflow into consideration and the purpose I want to use a given image for) even though many of these tools may overlap in functionality.
Zitat:
I got tired of MS stuff, so I stopped dealing with it, and it's a very good change. I still have to use some stuff for some reasons, but I just consider that a temporary thing, only happening because I still don't have the OpenSource solutions running. But that's all it is. I don't look to duplicate the exact functionality I've gotten used to, I just want to have the ability to do what I need to do, if it's done in a different way, that's fine with me.
That's really all I've been doing lately. I've been spending more time in Linux for a change.
Zitat:
But picassa, just dump that stuff and spend the time learning the linux tools, they are fine. If they don't work for you, check back in a year, and things will be at a different stage. It doesn't matter, the world will still spin around much as it's doing today.
I may or may not dump it (I probably will, since it's performance stinks under Linux from what I can tell using it against my NTFS partition with folders contaiing a lot of images). But, I'll try it if I want to, and I don't appreciate these kinds of comments:
Zitat:
[quote="slam"]You still prefer Windows, trust more in Windows applications and Windows file systems. Your NTFS partition is a holy grail...
Maybe I deserved that. I was a jerk when I first started posting here and I still am from time to time.
I just like Picasa as a browsing tool because of the way I can view images in a lot of folders in a continuous view. I think that's a neat approach. I don't know why more image browsers don't try to implement that viewing option.
It wasn't even designed by Google. They bought the company that developed it (probably in large part because of this interesting layout feature).
I think we'll probably see more apps take that approach in the future. If I were developing an image browser, I'd look at that implementing that feature for sure, along with the non-destructive edits (which is a common feature in tools that support layers, but Google's is a bit simpler from that respect and doesn't really have very sophisticated tools).
It looks like it's going to run too slow on Linux to be very useful anyway, though, at least that's my intital take on it after spending a bit more time in it.
Zitat:
The simple point slam is making here is that worrying about writing to ntfs only happens when you tie yourself into using ntfs.
Yes, I use Windows, and I am tied to it for some other reasons. For example, I've got some DOS and Windows applicatons that I enhance and maintain for a few friends.
One is an application that I developed originally about 15 years ago (originally DOS, now with both DOS and Windows pieces) used by a service company in Atlanta that a friend of mine owns, and I've made a lot of changes to it over the years. I've never even charged a dime for it, and I've spent countless hours enhancing it for them over the years.
I also spent some time in the Retail Information Systems industry, and I do work on a Windows based product used by Retail clients from time to time, too.
I also have software designed specifically for interfacing to some Telecom equipment that runs under Windows that I make use of from time to time (I spent a number of years in the Telecom industry). It's very specialized stuff.
Zitat:
And by all means, please read more of the real stuff on open source / free software. If something about those ideas dont' grab you inside at some level, then why on earth are you spending time on it?
I've got my reasons. For one thing, I don't trust Microsoft as far as I can throw them, and I don't like the way they do business and I don't like the way they try to lock out competition via proprietary formats.
Am I going to quit viewing content using those proprietary formats? No. I'm not, just like I'm not going to quit viewing images taken with cameras that are starting to use tactics like encryption to try and force you to use their software to throw roadblocks in front of third party developers.
Would I rather that nobody used these formats unless the manufacturers document them and "open them up" to others without restrictions?
Yes, and I'm starting to be more vocal in my opinion on that.
Heck, I started a thread here recently to discuss reverse engineering of video/audio formats and why it's legal or illegal to do it one way versus another to get some dialog going on this problem.
That thread was promptly removed.
No problem. I'm starting to like you guys and I wouldn't want to get you into any trouble if it's such a touchy subject because of German Laws.
I'm seeing differing opinons on that kind of thing here in these forums, too (without the level of detail that you guys worry about for legal reaons).
For example, Slam has a different view than I do (and some of the other forum members I've seen here). That's OK. So what if I don't agree with some of these views.
Ditto for products like SimplyMEPIS that include non-free software. We'll just have to differ in our opinions (and mine may or may not evolve over time). |
_________________
Jim C.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 15.09.2006, 19:20 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 02. Apr 2006
Beiträge: 121
|
|
So this topic has run away to something different than it was ment for but I have a comment about using NTFS support in Linux.
I have a hardware (Tvix mediaplayer) wich is not working with linux filesystems and because I have immagefiles of movies on my Tvix, they are normaly between 4 and 7 gb big so I can't use FAT. For the moment I am using windows to feed my Tvix with files but I would rather use Kanotix for that. Thats what I want NTFS support for. If it wouldn't be for this isue I would only use Windows as a gamingplattform. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Titel:
Verfasst am: 15.09.2006, 20:24 Uhr
|
|
Anmeldung: 25. Mar 2005
Beiträge: 2133
|
|
| Kanotix-2006-01-RC1 comes with NTFS write support. Apparently, Kano & al. feel confident about it. |
_________________
And I ain't got no worries 'cause I ain't in no hurry at all (Doobie Brothers, "Black Water").
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
