List Archive: gentoo-amd64
Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date.
provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.c.f. bug 424647
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-2" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Paul de Vrieze wrote:
<blockquote cite="firstname.lastname@example.org" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On Wednesday 01 March 2006 17:40, Michal Žeravík wrote:
<pre wrap="">Paul de Vrieze wrote:
<pre wrap="">On Wednesday 01 March 2006 17:17, Michal Žeravík wrote:
<pre wrap="">Hi all,
anyone know how to get %subj% on native gentoo64?
Kernel has partial write support, captive-ntfs seems to be x86 only.
Is there any way?
<pre wrap="">Write support is currently working best with the ntfs-progs / fuse combo.
The version in portage is not current though, and the new version is
probably better. You must have a fuse enabled kernel though.
<pre wrap="">from linux-ntfs.org:
*Write support:* Last, but not least, the kernel driver now does all
sorts of mambo jumbo when mounting a volume R/W. Features come slower
than ntfsmount (fuse) but much more stable.
So RW use of kernel-driver is now really reliable? (using 2.6.15-gentoo-r5)
Or better to use ntfsprogs/fuse?
The kernel is very reliable and will certainly not destroy your data, or even
require a chkdsk from windows. It does however support writing less often.
For both modes, writing is enabled, but does not always succeed. Whether or
not it succeeds is dependent on the structure of the directory the file is to
be written into.
well, only thing to enable ntfs-rw is with CONFIG_NTFS_RW ? <br>
And writing couldn't lead to destroying data then?<br>
Writing fail won't damage target ntfs directory structure?<br>
If so, is it repairable with chkdsk?<br>
I don't like to not corrupt friends' ntfs filesystems.<br>