Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 26 of 26

Thread: Poor man's install, with extra storage, on NTFS/Win7

  1. #21
    Senior Member registered user
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Columbia, Maryland USA
    Posts
    1,631
    I have started researching 'ntfs-3g' on this forum and find that
    using ntfs for remastering was a hot topic in early May of this
    year. Use the forum search function to see where Forester
    suggested it in so many words.

    Some of the current cast of characters on this topic were then
    just as uncertain about its advisability as I have expressed.

    What was the Defining Experience that made you (anyone) become
    less concerned with whether this was a risky business or not?

  2. #22
    Senior Member registered user
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    802
    Quote Originally Posted by utu View Post
    I have started researching 'ntfs-3g' on this forum and find that
    using ntfs for remastering was a hot topic in early May of this
    year. Use the forum search function to see where Forester
    suggested it in so many words.

    Some of the current cast of characters on this topic were then
    just as uncertain about its advisability as I have expressed.

    What was the Defining Experience that made you (anyone) become
    less concerned with whether this was a risky business or not?
    First, you have to distingush between full use of NTFS, e.g. for file system administration, and the very restricted use with this method, For instance, I would not recommend expanding the store files, rather create them anew, as I did with store.img yesterday.
    Second, there is an issue of relative risk. And the relative risk using ntfs-3g relative to using NTFS natively, is way lower than I had realized.
    Third, the use of NTFS for such purposes is exploding. Are the error reports also exploding, from competent users? Go figure.

  3. #23
    Senior Member registered user
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    423
    Quote Originally Posted by utu View Post
    What was the Defining Experience that made you (anyone) become
    less concerned with whether this was a risky business or not?
    I wouldn't say poor-man install on NTFS and running knoppix fuse/ntfs-3g is totally safe, considering that in my opinion, the original Knoppix does not shutdown properly, especially on fuse/NTFS. However, it is definitely safer than trying to use Win7 VHD on Linux.

  4. #24
    Senior Member registered user
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    802

    Yes, but should that be a threat for Windows?

    Quote Originally Posted by kl522 View Post
    I wouldn't say poor-man install on NTFS and running knoppix fuse/ntfs-3g is totally safe, considering that in my opinion, the original Knoppix does not shutdown properly, especially on fuse/NTFS. However, it is definitely safer than trying to use Win7 VHD on Linux.
    Sure, but I perceive this mostly to be a problem for Knoppix. Persistent image is inherently unsafe storage because of non-proper shutdown. If lack of proper file closure causes a file system corruption problem after random access to an established, allocation-wise unchanged file, then NTFS is worse than I am able to believe it is. Any program, at any time, might get stuck and die, leaving open files behind, and Windows can't rely on any special OS monitor being alive and kicking at the time to fix it.

    Do you think this bug may corrupt NTFS?

    In any case, please register this as a bug, as you know so much about it, and have a fix: http://www.knoppix.net/wiki/Bugs/6.4.4DVD. Very nice if you could include your patch(es) too. Of course, Klaus K is completely free to ignore all bug reports/suggestions, but the bug pages on the wiki here have been actively used by Klaus&co in earlier releases.

  5. #25
    Senior Member registered user
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    423
    Quote Originally Posted by Capricorny View Post
    Of course, Klaus K is completely free to ignore all bug reports/suggestions, but the bug pages on the wiki here have been actively used by Klaus&co in earlier releases.
    I think the first bug which needs to be logged is the extra /dev/loop/0 thingie. For decades, this unwanted "feature" has been around to bother all knoppix users, and Klaus&co are still totally unaware of it.

  6. #26
    Senior Member registered user
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    802
    Quote Originally Posted by kl522 View Post
    I think the first bug which needs to be logged is the extra /dev/loop/0 thingie. For decades, this unwanted "feature" has been around to bother all knoppix users, and Klaus&co are still totally unaware of it.
    Then go ahead and log it! I don't want to "spam" the knoppix-devel list with lots of detailed bug reports, but presenting a list of bugs/misfeatures, we may expect them to be corrected.
    And that shutdown thing is important, I think, so please file it.
    BTW, I think Knoppix just turned 10

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  


Sun Microsystems Blade 100 Workstation UltraSPARC-IIe 500MHz 256MB Server No HDD picture

Sun Microsystems Blade 100 Workstation UltraSPARC-IIe 500MHz 256MB Server No HDD

$95.00



Dell PowerEdge M640 Barebone Server Blade No Hard Drive Trays picture

Dell PowerEdge M640 Barebone Server Blade No Hard Drive Trays

$499.00



Dell PowerEdge FX2s CTO Blade 4 Slot 2U Chassis 2x 2000W picture

Dell PowerEdge FX2s CTO Blade 4 Slot 2U Chassis 2x 2000W

$399.00



Cisco UCS 5108 Blade Server Chassis Enclosure N20-C6508 4x PSU 8x Fans 2x Fabric picture

Cisco UCS 5108 Blade Server Chassis Enclosure N20-C6508 4x PSU 8x Fans 2x Fabric

$139.99



Dell PowerEdge M520 Blade Server Xeon E5-2403 NO HDD NO RAM picture

Dell PowerEdge M520 Blade Server Xeon E5-2403 NO HDD NO RAM

$45.00



HP Proliant BL460C Gen8 Blade Server 2x 8C E5-2690 192GB Ram picture

HP Proliant BL460C Gen8 Blade Server 2x 8C E5-2690 192GB Ram

$58.36



Cisco B200 M4 Blade Server-No Ram picture

Cisco B200 M4 Blade Server-No Ram

$50.00



Dell Blade M630 Server - 2x E5-2680V4 2.4GHZ/35M 14C- No Memory - No drives picture

Dell Blade M630 Server - 2x E5-2680V4 2.4GHZ/35M 14C- No Memory - No drives

$99.00



DELL PEM640 POWEREDGE M640 BLADE SERVER picture

DELL PEM640 POWEREDGE M640 BLADE SERVER

$539.95



HP ProLiant BL460c Gen9 Blade 2x E5-2650v4 2.2GHz =24 Cores 128GB P246 650FLB picture

HP ProLiant BL460c Gen9 Blade 2x E5-2650v4 2.2GHz =24 Cores 128GB P246 650FLB

$261.00