-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Steve Langasek a écrit :
Michael,
Please keep the Cc: list intact when replying.
On Tue, Apr 03, 2007 at 11:01:00PM +0200, Michael Fritscher wrote:
From my POV, the question is not whether ntfs-3g 1.0.0 should be included
in
etch (it won't
Package: ntfs-3g
Version: 1:0.0.0+20061031-6
Severity: critical
Tags: etch,sid,patch
This version is clearly stated as BETA as in
http://ntfs-3g.org/releases.html .
This version can cause huge data loss, expecially if the volume is very
fragmented (fix: a bug in chkdsk could result the removal of
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
This software is available in experimental state.
Who knows if 1.0.0. doesn't suffer of such critical bugs ?
It's too recent to be included in a Debian stable release, morever, have
you experiencied any issue with this ntfs-3g version ?
I don't
On Tue, Apr 03, 2007 at 10:41:39PM +0200, Adam Cécile (Le_Vert) wrote:
This software is available in experimental state.
Who knows if 1.0.0. doesn't suffer of such critical bugs ?
It's too recent to be included in a Debian stable release, morever, have
you experiencied any issue with this
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Steve Langasek a écrit :
On Tue, Apr 03, 2007 at 10:41:39PM +0200, Adam Cécile (Le_Vert) wrote:
This software is available in experimental state.
Who knows if 1.0.0. doesn't suffer of such critical bugs ?
It's too recent to be included in a
It killed already files for me and others.
It is mentioned in the forum, too:
http://forum.ntfs-3g.org/viewtopic.php?t=170highlight=
Another problem is that unmounting was asyncron in these early versions,
which can cause data loss, too.
So I strongly advise to drop this package, if you don't
On Tue, Apr 03, 2007 at 10:56:31PM +0200, Adam Cécile (Le_Vert) wrote:
Steve Langasek a écrit :
On Tue, Apr 03, 2007 at 10:41:39PM +0200, Adam Cécile (Le_Vert) wrote:
Contact debian-release if you have some serious reason to request
ntfs-3g 1.0.0. inclusion into etch.
From my POV, the
Michael,
Please keep the Cc: list intact when replying.
On Tue, Apr 03, 2007 at 11:01:00PM +0200, Michael Fritscher wrote:
From my POV, the question is not whether ntfs-3g 1.0.0 should be included
in
etch (it won't be), but whether the risk of this data loss is significant
enough that we
Steve Langasek wrote:
Michael,
Please keep the Cc: list intact when replying.
On Tue, Apr 03, 2007 at 11:01:00PM +0200, Michael Fritscher wrote:
From my POV, the question is not whether ntfs-3g 1.0.0 should be included
in
etch (it won't be), but whether the risk of this data loss is
9 matches
Mail list logo
