| 1 |
On 12 May 2008, at 14:07, Michael Schmarck wrote: |
| 2 |
> ... Reasons: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> - "DOS Filesystems" (fat, ntfs) don't allow to store all the metadata |
| 5 |
> you find on Linux. |
| 6 |
> - "Linux filesystems" (ext*, reiser, ...) don't allow to store all |
| 7 |
> the metadata you find on Windows. |
| 8 |
> - Sharing backup space means, that it get's used more often. This |
| 9 |
> makes the risk larger, that something bad happens. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
Apparently you missed my email 2 days ago. I'll cc you, so you don't |
| 12 |
miss this one. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
I said: |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
You keep saying this like it's obvious, but don't provide any good |
| 17 |
reason for it. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
There's no reason why I shouldn't have a singe external drive |
| 20 |
containing three directories: "My Mac", "Ann's Linux Box", "Bee's |
| 21 |
Windows PC". |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
I can only assume that you find it inelegant to store files on a |
| 24 |
filesystem which will not handle their metadata - ownership, group, |
| 25 |
permissions in the case of Linux, or the more sophisticated ACLs |
| 26 |
used by Windows XP Pro & 2003. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Just because YOU find it inelegant, doesn't mean that anyone else |
| 29 |
cares. A file is a file, and when recovering from backups most of |
| 30 |
us can drag & drop "My Photos" to the new filesystem and then take |
| 31 |
ownership of the files. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
I have tried not to get involved in this thread, but with today's |
| 34 |
posts you're really starting to make yourself look, um, eccentric. If |
| 35 |
I were you I'd shut up right now, before you do your reputation any |
| 36 |
more lasting damage. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
There are LOTS of ways to do things, and your way is not inherently |
| 39 |
right. I'm not saying your way is wrong, but you seem to be quite |
| 40 |
unjustifiably slinging that allegation at other people. |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
Stroller. |
| 43 |
-- |
| 44 |
gentoo-user@l.g.o mailing list |
Archives