ReiserFS for ReactOS & Windows -- Full Source Code

Here you can discuss ReactOS related topics.

Moderator: Moderator Team

Locked

Should ReiserFS be the ReactOS de facto filesystem driver while keeping FAT and others as optional?

Yes
85
60%
No
57
40%
 
Total votes: 142

Bond007s
Posts: 58
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2004 2:09 am

ReiserFS for ReactOS & Windows -- Full Source Code

Post by Bond007s » Wed May 18, 2005 6:35 pm

I found this on http://p-nand-q.com/download/rfstool.html. It includes source code and all. It allows compilation under gcc. This is a must. I remember the developers asking around on the dev mailing list for a windows source code of a ReiserFS driver. I hope it helps. All the talk of a new filesystem lately, well this might be it. Why would we need more security in FAT right now if we had this. This would allow security to begin to take shape. I hope this helps everyone.

Gasmann
Posts: 283
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2004 6:53 pm
Location: Germany
Contact:

Post by Gasmann » Wed May 18, 2005 6:49 pm

well, it's not really a filesystem 'driver', more a program with direct access to the reiserfs partitions (if I understood correctly) but maybe it could still be used to make a driver out of it...
However making ReiserFS the default FS I think is not so good, it should stay with FAT/FAT32, and give you an option for advanced users to install on other filesystems, however I think this is again a thing the user itself must decide and people may think of it in different ways...

Bond007s
Posts: 58
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2004 2:09 am

ReiserFS

Post by Bond007s » Wed May 18, 2005 7:43 pm

Sorry I jumped the gun. I downloaded and tried it out afterwards to see the functionality. Yes it is a program with direct access to reiserFS filesystems, but as you said it may be possible to use it to make a filesystem driver.

Why not select ReiserFS as the default? Most users automatically have NTFS. This is no different. Anyone that wants FAT should for my sight be more experienced Windows users that need it and know what they do because they want to most likely copy files back and forth. Lets face it, only odd balls have multiple OSs installed on one machine. I have. When I also meant with the Poll that it become the default FS of ReactOS, I meant when it becomes stable and useable under ReactOS.

Gasmann
Posts: 283
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2004 6:53 pm
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: ReiserFS

Post by Gasmann » Wed May 18, 2005 9:42 pm

Bond007s wrote:Why not select ReiserFS as the default? Most users automatically have NTFS. This is no different. Anyone that wants FAT should for my sight be more experienced Windows users that need it and know what they do because they want to most likely copy files back and forth. Lets face it, only odd balls have multiple OSs installed on one machine. I have.
I have multiple Operating Systems, too. But you're right if the user has only this one OS it would be better to use ReiserFS than FAT. ReiserFS is a lot better than FAT, so ok as long as you're asked during installation (like in Windows whether you want to use FAT or NTFS) it could be the default, too. I didn't think enough about it :)

HUMA2000
Posts: 235
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2004 1:06 pm
Location: España, al sur con el solecito
Contact:

Post by HUMA2000 » Wed May 18, 2005 10:11 pm

I vote to make reiserFS the default fs for ROS, it will be a great addition, and better than ntfs that is a propietary fs. FAT is not an option, it lacks lot of options!

Quigs
Posts: 78
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2004 7:24 am
Location: USA
Contact:

Post by Quigs » Wed May 18, 2005 10:34 pm

All I know:
We will eventually have to use something besides FAT or FAT32.

Gedi

Post by Gedi » Thu May 19, 2005 1:23 am

There is no Reiser4 driver for windows, an no one currently willing to write one.

ext2 is likely to be the next filesystem implemented in ROS as drivers are readily available, however there has been talk of other filesystems like JFS (very appealing) and the usage of NTFS via MS' NTFS driver (for Windows people with copies of Windows.)

There has been extensive posting on this topic in the mailing list recently with many ideas thrown about.

http://reactos.com:8080/archives/public ... hread.html

forart
Posts: 1050
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2004 1:36 pm
Location: Italy
Contact:

Post by forart » Thu May 19, 2005 11:24 am

I voted yes, anyway keep in consideration OpenBFS
»Forward Agency NPO
In progress we (always) trust.

rastilin
Posts: 34
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 12:26 pm

Post by rastilin » Thu May 19, 2005 4:32 pm

If it's any good then sure. The thing that worries me is that ext2 is not a journaled system, this is something that doesen't matter at all until you suddenly lose power and get annoying errors for days to come.

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

Lets just let this go.

Post by oiaohm » Fri May 20, 2005 1:12 am

Anything with good features and open spec filesystem is better as a filesystem NTFS due the fact the NTFS can be changed out side out control.

The good feature filesystem ext3(the updated ext2) Xfs Jfs ... the list goes on.

f22_storm
Posts: 15
Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 9:20 am
Location: BeiJing, China
Contact:

Post by f22_storm » Fri May 20, 2005 4:19 am

- Filesystem is very important. One system may has its own internal

filesystem, I think. Fat is out-of-date, NTFS is commercial.


- ReactOS must have its own filesysem.


Support you!

Dr. Fred
Developer
Posts: 607
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 10:09 pm
Location: Amsterdam

Post by Dr. Fred » Fri May 20, 2005 8:43 pm

f22_storm wrote:filesystem, I think. Fat is out-of-date, NTFS is commercial.
There lots of other filessystems but NTFS and Fat.

Writing a reiser4 Driver is in my mind the best approch because it's the fastes filesystem arround, atomic and also suported by the Linux Kernel. And it has it's Plugin-Api which Windows/NTFS specific futures can be implemented with.

But don't forget that you have to seperate Reiser3 and 4.
Where do you want ReactOS to go today ?

Craig
Posts: 9
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 2:03 am
Location: Boulder, CO
Contact:

Post by Craig » Tue Jun 21, 2005 6:52 am

By the time ReactOS gets closer to version 1, I have a feeling file system software and file system popularity will have changed. So, it's probably too early to settle on things like what should be the "default" and work on more salient issues.

For now, I would suggest sticking with FAT32. Then, support as many other file systems as seems practical. It may be that we can port much of what is being written for NTFS for linux, as write support is being taken somewhat seriouslty.

http://linux-ntfs.sourceforge.net/info/ntfs.html#3.2

I know NTFS has it's draw backs, but then no one could say that were that much less compatiable. :)

Bond007s
Posts: 58
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2004 2:09 am

FAT32 does not cut it.

Post by Bond007s » Tue Jun 21, 2005 4:59 pm

The Security file permissions need to be implimented sometime soon as the security subsystem is slowly becoming more developed. It is impossible to create good security on FAT without tweaking. Soon although file permissions will become a reality for this, for that reason I suggested a new file system like Reiser4. I realize that this is not a super developed driver for ReiserFS, but it is a start to a lower level driver. I think that sooner or later as security begins to take place, WAY BEFORE VERSION 1.0 I HOPE, a new filesystem will have to be taken place. ReiserFS is also a logical choice because it is the only FS that includes almost if not all of the features required and then some for ReactOS to be comparable to Windows NTFS. NTFS is not bad in the design, however it is comercial and is not so easy to make. I say we begin developement on a ReiserFS driver and call that for now, I am for sure that this would give the functionality for security to bloom and as the project gets more mature other filesystems can begin to take place....

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

Craig Don't hold you breath on Linux NTFS fixing it.

Post by oiaohm » Wed Jun 22, 2005 2:30 pm

Specs of the current NTFS filesystems have been expanded This means there will be some internal changes.

Linux NTFS filesystem write driver will not be complete any time soon.

Captive is still used to provide the best read write access.

Guess what it uses the standard NTFS driver of windows and the Reactos Kernel parts. So Reactos sould not really have a large amount of problem accessing NTFS just use the read only linux driver to let you load the windows driver no problems.

Now the problem is for people without Microsoft licences or copies of windows installed.

Basicly if we endup with the linux NTFS driver complete and a extra filesystem this will not be a problem. But if the NTFS driver does not complete in time Reactos will be in trouble. We need a filesystem for the users.

The worst resualts of a NTFS write stuff up is complete data loss. Now I prefer incompad to data destruction.

The Draw backs of sticking to NTFS are far past a joke.

Risk of users data due to lack of information about filesystem.
Microsoft can change the format of NTFS at any time(causing data loss). I suspect they have all ready done this with the out come of installing windows NT 4.0 and Windows 2000 together not worth the data loss if installed in the wrong order.
Lack of repair tools for quick porting.

Lets forget NTFS as a idea. Make sure We have a readonly driver that works. Make sure reactos can use the Microsoft NTFS driver.
And Make us have another filesystem that supports what we require.

Note linux current version NTFS driver provides enought power to run a loop back filesystem inside windows. Hmm a tar.gz/.zip/.7z or something Loop back filesystem anyone that a arcive program under windows can access to transfer files into and out of. So reactos can be installed inside windows to run inside windows partitions.

Locked

Who is online

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