|
|
|
#1 (permalink) | ||||||||||||
|
Linux Lobbyist
|
there is no reason to use a "media" partition when dual booting (unless your trying to use a less sain File system for linux)
http://www.fs-driver.org/ -perfect read/write support for ext3 in windows http://www.ntfs-3g.org/ -perfect read/write support for ntfs in linux Ubuntu Code:
sudo -i export WIN="<windows partiton>" apt-get install ntfs-3g echo "/dev/$WIN /media/$WIN ntfs-3g defaults 0 0 >>/etc/fstab mkdir /media/$WIN exit then install http://www.fs-driver.org/
__________________
Last edited by General : 07-16-08 at 04:08 AM. |
||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
#2 (permalink) | |||||||||||||
|
Apple Doesn't Love You
|
ntfs is a horrible filesystem. I use an ext3 driver for windows to see my media and try to avoid having linux deal with ntfs at all.
The commands you posted need a bit of explanation. Is <windows partition> supposed to be something like sda1 or sdb2? If so, mounting the partition at /media/sda1 isn't exactly a good naming convention. Also, I prefer to use a partition's UUID in fstab. If you disconnect/reconnect harddrives the path in /dev usually changes. Relying on that path isn't a great idea
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
#3 (permalink) | |||||||||||||
|
Linux Lobbyist
|
Quote:
also why are you hotplugging harddrives? devices appear in the order of there bus ex: SATA@0 -> sda SATA@2 -> sdb USB@0 ->sdc unless the device was hotplugged, something I'm not a fan of
__________________
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
#4 (permalink) | ||||||||||||
|
Linux Lobbyist
|
I second rabidgnome. NTFS is a terrible file system when compared to ext3, Reiser, XFS, or other typical Linux journaling file systems.
__________________One example: have you ever heard of anyone "defragging" their Linux box? No, you haven't. Why not? Because, unlike NTFS, old ext3 files don't get fragmented all over the hard drive. Everyone, even M$, knows this is a major problem with both FAT32 and NTFS. It's a pretty big flaw. There are many other advantages of ext3 -- for one it is usually faster in most applications. Sorry, I see no advantages in using NTFS, especially if you intend to put Linux on it.
|
||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
#5 (permalink) | ||||||||||||
|
Overclocker
|
QFE, this is correct.
|
||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
#6 (permalink) | ||||||||||||
|
Mmmm! Toast!
|
I don't think anyone suggested NTFS usage, but if you NEED to access an ntfs volume from linux, this would be the way to do it.
__________________
Rocket 3 down-payment fund: [|||||||||] $6k e6750 @ 3.2 Ghz (400x8) - 7k ppd GPU+SMP
|
||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
#7 (permalink) | ||||||||||||||
|
Apple Doesn't Love You
|
Quote:
I've also had drive paths change themselves (even the SATA ones) just from removing/adding an external drive.
|
||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
#8 (permalink) | ||||||||||||
|
Mmmm! Toast!
|
Definitely second the usage of UUIDs. the path is great for something quick and dirty (and temporary), but an 'important' volume shouldn't use /dev/hdXX
__________________
Rocket 3 down-payment fund: [|||||||||] $6k e6750 @ 3.2 Ghz (400x8) - 7k ppd GPU+SMP
|
||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
#9 (permalink) | ||||||||||||||
|
Linux Lobbyist
|
Linux can access the ntfs system anyway. It's just a matter of mounting it.
__________________
Q6600 G0 @ 3409 4600+ Manchester @ 2809.9 Member of the LGCQuote:
|
||||||||||||||
|
|
|
![]() |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|