On Sunday 26 October 2008, Paul de Weerd wrote: > On Sun, Oct 26, 2008 at 09:51:38PM +0200, Alexey Suslikov wrote: > | Paul de Weerd wrote: > | > On Sun, Oct 26, 2008 at 12:01:40PM -0700, Chris Kuethe wrote: > | > | On Sun, Oct 26, 2008 at 11:41 AM, Matthew Weigel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > | > | > Actually, (2^32)-1, or 4GB, is the max size per file > | > | > (http://support.microsoft.com/kb/314463). I can see that > | > | > being a problem if you're trying to run a database off of > | > | > your thumb drive, but otherwise... can you give examples of > | > | > files that you (or anyone you know) would like to access in > | > | > Windows and OpenBSD that exceed this limit? > | > | > | > | dvd images are often >4.2G > | > > | > I agree with Chris here .. the only time I've wanted to transport > | > large files between windows and basically !windows (macosx, linux > | > and *bsd) they were ISO's of either regular CD's (works) or DVD's > | > (doesn't fit in fat32). > | > > | > Happened to me on a couple of occassions that I wanted to do this > | > and had to resort to network transfers (non-optimal in those > | > circumstances). > | > | Come on guys. > | > | I believe OpenBSD can do read/write on ext2. No? > | > | And there is the http://www.fs-driver.org/ - also free > | and do read/write on ext2 for Windows. > > True, but it's an external add-on that you may not always be able to > install on the windows machine (which in my case usually isn't mine). > OpenBSD, FreeBSD, NetBSD, Linux, Mac OSX .. they all have 'native' > support for FAT32. > > Granted, I don't see an easy solution for this issue (because in > essence it would mean that all others need proper ntfs support). >
Hi Paul, It seems you and others are missing the obvious; If Microsoft actually wanted other operating system vendors to read and write NTFS, they would have provided the specifications. Trying to build and maintain compatibility with a vendor which specifically doesn't want you to build or maintain compatibility is an exercise in futility. There is no easy solution because Microsoft does not want an easy solution to exist. If anyone does create an easy solution, Microsoft will undoubtedly, once again, change things so they remain incompatible. --Oh and don't forget MS FAT/FAT32 is patent encumbered so the only reason why you still have "native support" for it is because Microsoft has not pushed the issue in the courts or taking the time to write a new incompatible version of FAT32. If you consider an ever changing, undocumented, closed source file system to be a problem, the best thing you can do is migrate to using something else. OpenBSD does provide read access to NTFS for the sake of faster migration, but even this is fairly unnecessary since one could transfer the data over a network connection. There's no reason to bloat the OpenBSD kernel with a feature designed as a fast solution to a temporary problem, namely migration. The answer is not fighting for NTFS support, instead, the answer is migrating away from NTFS. If someone absolutely insists on running something intentionally incompatible, the only viable answer is to leave them out in the cold until they change their mind. Kind Regards, Jon
