How about ZFS as ReactOS file system?

Here you can discuss ReactOS related topics.

Moderator: Moderator Team

Z98
Release Engineer
Posts: 3379
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 8:16 pm
Contact:

Post by Z98 »

ReactOS can't legally distribute XP's NTFS driver. They need to get around that problem if ReactOS is intended to be something that just works, which I think it is.

Harteex
Posts: 224
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2004 9:21 pm
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Post by Harteex »

Z98 wrote:ReactOS can't legally distribute XP's NTFS driver. They need to get around that problem if ReactOS is intended to be something that just works, which I think it is.
Well ReactOS doesn't need to distribute the driver.
If the user doesn't have a windows installation with an NTFS partitions, it doesn't really matter... there is no need to have an NTFS driver.

If Windows is installed on another partition ReactOS could use an NTFS read-only driver to copy and activate the driver from the Windows installation.

Coviti
Posts: 300
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:26 am

Post by Coviti »

I never suggested that ReactOS distribute XP's drivers, but we should *eventually* have a fully Windows compatible Read/Write NTFS driver. Sorry for the confusion. ;)

Z98
Release Engineer
Posts: 3379
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 8:16 pm
Contact:

Post by Z98 »

That suggestion again brings back Windows into the equation. I believe the objective is to make it so that the end user is completely independent of Windows. This would mean a driver that doesn't depend on things from Windows if they wanted to achieve total independence. On the other hand, if ReactOS needed a particular Windows file, that wouldn't be disasterous either, but the ideal situation would be not needing that. On a practical level, we'll need to see what the developers decide to do.

oiaohm
Posts: 1322
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 8:40 am

Post by oiaohm »

Coviti and Z98. My problem is the hell NTFS drivers can let loss and do let loss.
NTFS 4.0, a few modifications of that will allow it to read and write to NTFS 5.0, modifications to that allow read/write to NTFS 5.1, WinFS, etc. And another point, a lack of a good NTFS driver could be used against us by MS.
Linux NTFS driver has read-write. Creating new files is still very dangerous. Write of existing files has stablised. Note this does not touch filesystem permissions and other flags.

NTFS is not straight forward as a few alterations from one version to the next.

Linux personal knows mixings many Linux OS on a machine with permissions on a filesystem can be big problems. People using reactos may or may not be ready for this.

Mixing different versions of Windows on a machine is also harmful.

NTVFS solution harms linux more than windows. The harm can be handled if we be careful since we know all the Linux expected permissions and the like. Changes in Linux/Posix filesystems don't happen quickly 6 to 8 years compared to about once every 2 years for Windows lot simpler target to catch. The NTFS filesystem handling is different even between First version Windows XP and Windows XP sp2.

For how stable reactos is we are better off in a different filesystem. Ok ext2/3 is not as big of a problem. Reason linux does not have to mount every part it finds unlike Windows.
"Insufficient for the needs of most users", and tell them that we don't support their filesystems
Bigger effect against us is. Don't Use Reactos it will destory your files just keep on altering the filesystem so reactos's driver does just that.

I have seen NTFS usb keys become unstable to complete useable just by moving between versions of Windows we cannot afford for Reactos to do this. Nothing wrong with the key just what the each OS has done is not compad with each other.

If you are really serous about having NTFS filesystem in Reactos. I have a project for you. Get NTFS some how a open standard. Funding for a legal fight in the EU or the like if the SAMBA battle in the EU wins. With the complete specs for all partys means one side cannot just keep on changing.

They will say "Insufficient for the needs of most users" no matter what we do.

Z98
Release Engineer
Posts: 3379
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 8:16 pm
Contact:

Post by Z98 »

It's a level of practicality. If I walked into the school office and said, let's switch to ReactOS(assuming I do this when ReactOS becomes more usable), the school does not want to hear "Oh, we also have to reformat all the harddrives." Same would hold true for other organizations that might consider switching to ReactOS. They probably have harddrives dedicated to just data and they don't want to bother with all that mess.

The reality is NTFS is basically the standard amongst small businesses and many home users, even amongst some major corporations. While someone like me could easily reformat my HDs and leave NTFS behind, I would never do it for a variety of reasons. The primary is that I would be cutting myself off to the majority of the consumer world that does use NTFS.

Also, trying to get Microsoft to make NTFS an open standard is pointless. Their business model does not allow for such a concession to their competitors. Even when ordered to do so, they BS their way through it. If we wanted to make Microsoft regret their course of action, the best way would be to show them how easily people can discard their products and how their efforts are being wasted in trying to create things to lock people in.

Yes NTFS is flawed. No, it won't go anyway anytime soon. And again, ReactOS' objective means that NTFS read-write support needs to be added in sometime or another. Besides which, the permissions settings of Windows itself is not designed to take advantage of things like ext3 and etc. Using a FS designed for Unix-like operating systems wouldn't really benefit ReactOS unless the permissions system was rewritten as well, creating even more work.

oiaohm
Posts: 1322
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 8:40 am

Post by oiaohm »

Reformat of clients not a large issue. Clients being unstable using more tech support time very big issue. Reason unlikely to just jump ship. Reactos and Windows most likely be side by side for a while. Vampiring the NTFS driver safest methord.

Note most schools and large companys do a reimage about once every 12 months if a format was required it would be done in the reimage so not a problem really. Everything is stored on the central server not local clients.
Replacing the Server is about the only place where NTFS becomes a issue even then not much. Upgrading Server normally includes replacing harddrives so moving data is common.
Using a FS designed for Unix-like operating systems wouldn't really benefit ReactOS unless the permissions system was rewritten as well, creating even more work.
Notice that I keep pointing to NTVFS from SAMBA 4. This is every permission and filetype of NTFS on posix filesystems with xattr. The unix-like filesystem has not been changed. Its a translation from Windows filesystem permissions to Posix ones using xattr to store the extra infomation required. Posix filesystem have built to be expandable. Ported to reactos opens up every Posix filesystem with xattr. That is a lot of filesystems.

Linux NTFS support is good enough to support a loop back filesystem. If freeloader supports booting reactos from a image file inside NTFS file format would not really be a issue as long as that file was accessable from windows. This way reactos permissions are out of Windows way unlikely to cause trouble. Still need a filesystem that works.

NTFS is a standard by small businesses and the like because that is what the OS installs on and has security. Windows XP installed on Fat32 has no secuirty at all. Not because NTFS is required there are no other options under windows at current time. Even if you do swap the NTFS driver out the boot loader will not work.

Now lets look at the Linux world the Standard is EXT3 does every distro use this no competion lets it all ways can every distro even read EXT3 in truth no some don't have EXT3 drivers. Does this stop those distros from being used No it does not. The argument that its a requirement is pointless NTFS is only the Standard because it has no competion on one platform.

Most usb keys are Fat32. People who format they keys NTFS normally learn that was a bad idea. NTFS is not found in any devices I know of. Its not a hardware interface problem as far as I know.

ReactOS objective is compadablity. The means to run Windows apps safely. This does not have to include a NTFS read write driver. If a person needs a NTFS read write driver most likely they all ready have Windows. Programs need NTFS filesystem options if the under filesystem happens to be EXT3 but the program thinks it NTFS that is all that is important.

Trying to make SMB open standard you would say is point less too by your argument. DoJ and the EU is now demarding it the longer MS fights the more it will cost them. Same point if people really require this Microsoft is reducing market competion by not publishing specs. With specs if they alter things to break Reactos the we will have Microsoft by the NUTS. Making ourself close to compad only weakings out case against them.

Now if a open source filesystem is altered in away that breaks Samba it will be on. Samba and Reactos verse the change. This way is safe.

Also Reactos having a filesystem outside Windows means its protected more fear to Microsoft.

Ever worked in a K12LTSP school common formats is EXT3 and NFS. Everything Linux. NTFS is only a issue where windows is installed even then not a large one. K12LTSP places would love to have Windows Clients just the OS is too far out the price range. A market prime for the picking. Stable Compad will take off for sure.

Z98
Release Engineer
Posts: 3379
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 8:16 pm
Contact:

Post by Z98 »

You are not going to get anywhere by forcefeeding Windows users a completely new filesystem. Also, I'm not sure where you get the idea that schools reimage every 12 months or something. At my school, we don't do that because we don't have the manpower nor do we have the money to hire more people to do that kind of work. Also, that would mean reinstalling all the applications, drivers, and hooking them back onto the school network. The majority of those things are not located onto a central server, nor could you get onto the central server without getting onto the network in the first place, requiring the installation of the network client. If the school actually had that kind of tech support team at the ready, they would not need my help.

You're also forgetting that the way ReactOS is being designed, it follows the Windows NT design. This means that the way it probably handles permissions will be like how Windows handles it. Windows NT permissions = NTFS.

I volunteer in a high school that shares one network administrator with the rest of the freaking district. We have Windows for all the client operating systems. As the person trying to get them off Microsoft, I have to present them with a viable alternative. If I wanted a Linux/Unix FS, I'd just hand them a Linux distribution. However, that's impossible with the drivers, applications, and other issues at hand. If the alternative does not have NTFS read-write support then it's a no-go at the moment. This situation is probably happening in dozens of other places that are considering switching to open source. ReactOS has the best chance of turning people around, if it supports NTFS read-write without additional tinkering by network admins and users. If it's default was something else, that's going to seriously put off the people I would need to convince to being any such conversion. And quite frankly, saying I should convince them otherwise is a pointless argument, cause they're looking for something that'll happen quickly.

That viewpoint is most likely shared by many other people around the world. If ReactOS wants to stand a chance, they're going to have to idiot-proof their OS as best as possible. That means not having the end-user need to reformat their HDs or etc. In computer science, we're taught two things. People are stupid and people are sadists. They'll screw up because they don't know what they're doing and they'll screw up just to see what would happen. So either way, they're bound to do damage to themselves if too many things are offered to them.

MadWolf
Posts: 559
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2005 4:19 am
Contact:

Post by MadWolf »

hi all

reading this thread and one things comes to mind nether underestimate the power of stupid people in stupid numbers

get partition magic and then you can format 10 computers in 20 mins or there about

oiaohm
Posts: 1322
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 8:40 am

Post by oiaohm »

What I work with we do. Man power about 1 per 500 machines not all that 1 to 500 are even IT personal.

One way to make sure at the start of year not one machine has a non permited alteration. System used is like unattented on sourceforge.net

Machines set boot from network as default option followed by harddisk. Server says don't boot normally. Reimage is simple just activate the boot from network server this also works if a harddrive has been replaced just tag that machine for imaging. This does the reinstall licence keys the after script does the MS registration. Network registration everything is done by the scripts not much work at all. Most machines that fails this have defects that will cause problems threw the year. Ie dead ram dieing harddrives...

Some older machines with old bois we have to use a startup disk. A single floppy/cd/usb key even some of those have boot from network patchs added to bios.

All you have to is flick the power switch and let go once set right. Basicly any person can be flicking the power switch no admin right no password no nothing.
You're also forgetting that the way ReactOS is being designed, it follows the Windows NT design. This means that the way it probably handles permissions will be like how Windows handles it. Windows NT permissions = NTFS.
I am not. NTVFS is ment to provide just that without risk. Problem each version of Windows have permissions and hidden data that it excepts and permissions it does not except. This leads to big problems this is minor compared to that each version of the NTFS driver handles the filesystem itself is slightly different even without including permissions. All this leads to one thing trouble. I have learnt this the hard way by having different versions of Windows all installed on one machine.

Boot network tech is used alot this even includes drbl in some rooms.

Idiot proof. Using NTFS is not idiot proof. The concept that NTFS is a predictable filesystem. This is a very dangous concept filesystem without specs it is not predictable. Even the past interactions of the NTFS drivers have shown this past all question. So if you really want to use it. We really need the specs so it cannot be a moving target any more.

Network Admins in some places really need to improve there skills at handling large numbers of computers.

Thinking that all applications are going to have to be reinstalled anyhow. Reformating is not really that much of a problem. Think open source tools resize NTFS as well this is a mute point. If you don't have some form of unattented install you are just making your life hard.

Z98
Release Engineer
Posts: 3379
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 8:16 pm
Contact:

Post by Z98 »

Except that not every school has such an arrangment. And my school certainly does not do a boot off network, nor could they with the present hardware limitations.

There will be computers that remain Windows at the school no matter what. The school is not going to implement something else just to let those machines be able to read HDs not formated NTFS or FAT32. If a replacement comes along, it better damn well have NTFS read-write, or they won't consider it. And again, the everyday consumer isn't going to want to go through the trouble of setting something up to allow Windows to read the FS of an operating system that claims to be a reimplementation of Windows NT.

What you want in ReactOS would work for your situation, but it would make things much more difficult for others. If a proposal to change the school district's technology layout was brought up before any school board, they would throw it out unless it was cheap and would be seamless, meaning minimal hassle on the part of resetting certain services. If we went with a different FS, it would be literally an all or nothing move. They see something like that, they're going to get seriously worried. There's also the fact that the server software may also be a bit dated. Making it support ext3 may not be possible. If you want to introduce a new technology, you cannot just drop it in. Introducing another FS is similar. To make it work with what was originally there would require time that the NT admin might not have. If your school actually has the money and manpower to do that, go for it, but considering the budget crunch so many US schools are facing, I doubt my school's the only one that would walk away from such a proposal.

oiaohm
Posts: 1322
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 8:40 am

Post by oiaohm »

NTFS permissions do travel threw network. This does not require NTFS. NTVFS is the way the underdevelopment samba 4 does NT permissions.

Reactos Drivers will be compad with Windows. So the driver to access Reactos Parts will come with it.

Installing Reactos will be like any other OS. All applications will have to be reinstalled.

Last buget crush here was bad. Reason for central install systems. Don't have the man power to deal with major system infections. Solution using network boot to provide workaround. Networks was setup to reduce the ammount of man power required. It has pulled that off.

Different FS does not alter the network operations. Reactos will be able to read NTFS. Reactos is not just targeted at Windows NT. Note Locking reactos so users cannot format ext3. You can selection what users are allowed to format on removable disks in windows anyhow.

Hmm servers getting a bit dated. I guess where you are don't have anyform of unattentend setup system also.

I really can see Samba 4 when its complete being useful were you are. Moves all server upto Windows 2003 standard and above.

It seams a little strange that you would trip up over a ext2/3 filesystem. There are many options to read these on windows any how. If I was sugesting something like zfs. I could understand it.

Z98
Release Engineer
Posts: 3379
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 8:16 pm
Contact:

Post by Z98 »

Because certain organizations, such as my school, won't implement ext3 support just to suit an operating system like ReactOS. You can say they're being dumb or whatever for sticking with NTFS, but that's the way they want to do things and nothing in the near-term is going to change their minds. The school already has NTFS support. This would allow us to just drop in ReactOS if its default was NTFS. That would not be true if that was not the case. You say it's simple, they see it as a hassle. Quite frankly, having one person that takes care of the servers and all the workstations makes things difficult. And even I'm going to balk at having to install support on over a hundred PCs. And before you suggest remote deployment, think again. We don't have remote deployment nor do we have the money to get the software to do it. And open source operating systems aren't an option if they can't run Windows applications and WINE is still a hassle to make things work properly. Setting up 16 laptops was already a pain.

Matthias
Posts: 496
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2005 12:43 am

Post by Matthias »

Z98 wrote:[lots of bullshit]
I don't know whether you read what i and Harteex were writing. But what i do know is that you obviously didn't understand it (or perhaps you don't want to understand).
By the way, if you want users to switch to ReactOS, how should they get rid of their old OS without formatting?

As for a file system, ext3 supports "extended attributes". In the Linux Kernel configuration it says:
Extended attributes are name:value pairs associated with inodes by the kernel or by users
These extended attributes were used to implement UNIX ACLs on ext3, so it should also be possible to implement NTFS ACLs with them.

oiaohm
Posts: 1322
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 8:40 am

Post by oiaohm »

Matthias Z98 is a primitive to both of us. I guess both of us are using automatic deployment systems of some form I bet. And Z98 is going the hardway to lacking in infomation to know a simpler way exists.

Z98 you just make me laugh how people without knollage suffer.
And before you suggest remote deployment, think again. We don't have remote deployment nor do we have the money to get the software to do it.
The base software to do it is Free. http://unattended.sourceforge.net/ and http://ani.sourceforge.net/ are free there are others. Note we got comerical when they work out that this would pay for itself. Thinking that unattented was more than pay for the time it was taking us to set it up. The comerical took less of our time. Even in some cases were hardware was extactly the same we imaged with clonezilla or g4u still would take better comerical tools. Open Source is a base point. You are not even to the base point.

3 years ago 100 machines was something to fear before we went automated.
Quite frankly, having one person that takes care of the servers and all the workstations makes things difficult.
Smell the nuke. Our buget was reshaped. System was not, staff was. $40000 goes along way in network hardware and remote install software. Better network for the students less personal. Bit of a case either you find away to handle the numbers of machines or we fire you and hire someone else who can.

We even use remote deployment systems on laptops. Unattented and ANI support different profiles Enter bios set to network boot. All new laptops with network ports can boot from network after install reset bios can be done in the case to a know laptop a operational NVRAM=CMOS image can be kept and uploaded at end of install setting the permissions.

Reactos to be deployed in my system is required to be stable and remote deployable in some form. NTFS is really not a issue. The compad with Windows application is a requirement. Compad with a filesystem that in future can cause more problems is not really worth it. What is the point of moving to Reactos if due to interations between Windows and Reactos installed on the one machine is unstable. At least core of Reactos in a different filesystem Reactos will not be made unstable by Windows or Windows made unstable by Reactos. A write wall between them protects both of them from each other.

I will give that Wine is a pain in the but at times. Its a race between Wine and Reactos to see who can provide the compad we need. Curent versions of Wine are getting better.

You are really forgeting. Clean installs will be required by any new OS. Upgrades only lead to trouble cross grades are even worse. What do you think there is in implementing ext3 support? You add support for hardware and printers to clients do you not. Ie a driver. A filesystem is just a driver. Boot loader is the only lock that stops windows from being installed on the ext3 filesystem. This might even be removed by another project.

OS's Never just drop in. With low staff levels you don't have time to be at a machine while it installs you start it and walk away check email at end of day to make sure it completed. There are more important things to be doing. Replacing harddrives/ram ie dead parts. Upgrading the web interfaces or some other required interface even basic tutor to teachers so they don't give students access to their more powerful accounts.

Installing 20 new machines takes some time centeral database has to be updated with the new keys if not using a volume licence. This is short than the time to cart to location unpack put on table and connect all leads including the all important network one.

Secound bigest advantage the software disks are carted nowhere. They are just locked away. No more where is the OS disks Office disks and the like.... Ie lot simpler. And some student nickos the COA on the case at least we have the number in the server and can quote it to Microsoft and ask for a replacement due to past one being destoryed.

Third almost any person can do what is need at the client end to reinstall on a client unless network card has died. On Phone help X machine is now not operational. Alter the Boot from network to allow remote diagnostics ask person to reboot the machine so you can test it. If its not a hardware problem just reimage. Lot less walking/running to problems that don't require it. Even in some cases if I am busy I will ask them to get someone to bring the machine to me. I can be running Diagnositcs in 20 different locations. First time it was submited that on this day a person repaired a huge pile of machines when there was no way to travel between them even at the speed of light and do it. Lot of questions was asked how or is the a con job to get a wage rise. It supprising how many faults are just software problems. Also when I have to repair a machine I turn up in alot of case with the need parts instead of having to cart everything. Ie a ram sticks or a harddrive lot simpler.

Took people a while to get use to tech walking up open case insert new ram sticks or drive or some card. Place a sign don't touch machine until the login screen appears after login appears internal mail sign back and walk off. If I get email and sign everything has to be fine. The signs have a bar code. Centeral database attachs sign to job. So any where the a sign does not come back a checkup happens. Staff learnt hold on to sign if still broken. And that the bar code on sign linked to bug report and could be used to notify us on the same job. Ie history of problem does make tech work simpler.

Catchup with the times please life is alot better.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ahrefs [Bot] and 1 guest