-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Randall R Schulz wrote: > On Sunday 17 June 2007 01:13, G T Smith wrote: >> Randall R Schulz wrote: >>> ... <snip>
> > Windows software tends to assume text files (e.g.) are in its format. > Much Linux software tolerates any of the three extant formats. Binary > file formats aren't likely to vary and are usually specific to one OS > or the other (exectuables, e.g.) and aren't going to be used by the OS > that's not active. > > The NTFS security model subsume that required by Unix, does it not? > Probably depends whether one is using the native unix fs security model or the ACL extensions. NTFS file security is ACL based anyway. Synchronising SAM/SID based ACLS with unix UID/GID based mechanisms might get at a little involved. Quotas if implemented might be a headache. The current ro NTFS mount seems to ignore NT/XP security but does not display some of the NT system files that I would expect to see. However, as another poster pointed out one is leaving the Linux side fully open to Windows (in)security... > However, I took a quick look at the NTFS-3G site, and I noticed that it > said FUSE was required. If it's not a kernel-mode file system > implementation, then it doesn't seem likely one could use it for the > root file system—there'd be a chicken-and-egg problem (also known as a > bootstrapping problem...) being able to access the root file system. That probably is a show stopper.. there probably could be a work round (e.g. a windows exe that mounts an appropriate image) but this then gets all rather involved again. Rather depends how many hoops one wants to jump through to get something to work... Briefly experimented with a fuse based mechanism for creating a rw NTFS mount... it triggered an integrity check when booting into windows after writing one small test file. Not an experiment I am going to repeat, when a NTFS volume gets too badly fouled up recovery can be damn near impossible... > > Simple or complex, I don't think it would go beyond being a curiosity > for me. It would still be a dual-boot solution, and I don't need that—I > require concurrent access, which is why I use VMware. > Likewise on former, if I need to do stuff in Linux and Windows at the same time (which is rare), booting into Windows and using Cygwin to create an X session to another box works for me... The OP suggested this as an option for new users so that would not need to repartition their hard drive on installing. I am not too sure that this idea would be a good initial offering for a newbie ... > > Randall Schulz -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFGdWPMasN0sSnLmgIRAlPAAKDhrb1XjXexQNOS9X8W4JMtWZnYuQCgyuKY XQpyGamCisTeuLOruzm9pVE= =ZfI4 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
