NTFS question

All development related issues welcome

Moderator: Moderator Team

User avatar
EmuandCo
Developer
Posts: 4394
Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2004 7:52 pm
Location: Germany, Bavaria, Steinfeld
Contact:

Re: NTFS question

Post by EmuandCo »

bobsobol wrote:And this is the single most frustrating thing I see frequently coming from ROS development... the primary reason to have an open source NT based OS is native access to *ALL* features of NT file system via Win32 PE executables... anything else I can do from FreeDOS, ntfsDOS and HX-DOS.
And you did not listen. I never said we wont support NTFS, just maybe not as Primary FS.
bobsobol wrote:[*]You can't run many server based applications that rely on NTFS permissions for their own system security without "emulating" those features on top of any other file system... and ReactOS has always been about reimplementing, not emulating. If you want to emulate Windows you use Wine.[/list]
Theres no such think like a NTFS feature in MS Windows. All depends on the IFS Driver system and you could use all the permission stuff on ext3, too, if theres a good ext3 IFS driver, which includes all IFS features.
bobsobol wrote:... or where you all simply not aware of these "native features"? I think not. I think you fine fellows are far too knowledgeable for that. I just can't believe you could have achieved so much without knowing such things.
I love you, too!
bobsobol wrote:[*]Windows NT = I've not seen it, and don't (yet) believe the claim.
There are some Fuse port attempts, but none is good enough or still in the works.

And the rest. Wise words. I mostly agree with you :-D
ReactOS is still in alpha stage, meaning it is not feature-complete and is recommended only for evaluation and testing purposes.

Haos
Test Team
Posts: 2954
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2007 5:42 am
Contact:

Re: NTFS question

Post by Haos »

I do also think that native NTFS support is a must. Native - meaning as a normal IFS driver, without any third party layers, like FUSE.
Albeit FUSE has its merits, it can only act as a temporary solution, until proper support is implemented. I do agree here with bobsobol wholeheartedly.

On the other hand you, bobsobol, have to realise, that we are very far away even from proper IFS support at the present moment. It is natural that we want to achieve most with least time and resources spent. This is the reason for arwinss and FUSE presence in this project. A jury-rigged construct, useful until there is proper support, nothing more.

bobsobol
Posts: 18
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2007 9:59 pm

Re: NTFS question

Post by bobsobol »

That's re-assuring Haos.

I don't mind "we don't have time yet" answers... I don't like "we have no intention of ever" answers... there should be some plan for it at some point in the future, otherwise people will develop other parts in a manner which will have to be completely re-written when the realisation hits the rest of the team that some things just aren't possible unless you support the native NT filesystem. (or the fabled and shelved MS WinFS or something else which supports all the NTFS features in it's own way... but better, true NTFS)

NTFS was an integral part of the design of the NT kernel when it was still called HPFS, and Windows NT was called "Microsoft OS/2"... FAT is still supported for the same reason ISO9660 is supported, and you can boot NT off of that as well... that doesn't make it a good choice for your primary OS boot partition. ;)

P.S. EmuandCo, thank you. I do love you guys... but I don't see that "wrapping" NTFS-a-like features on any alien filesystem is a "good" solution. You're welcome to do it, and doing so would be a "nice" bonus... but making anything except NTFS (or something completely new like WinFS... Maybe an OpenWinFS as that would "stick it to the man") the primary FS is entirely secondary to getting full NTFS features working on MS created partitions. The benefits of having that level of compatibility make (or will make) ReactOS far more "useful" and "attractive" to users from Server Admins to SMEs and "Geeks to Go" technicians (like me) who are likely to be your driving force in marketing ReacOS to wider audiences.

Let me put it this way... You aren't going to convince Linux users that ReactOS is better because it's Windows that's Open Source... They have an OSS OS and it works very well and they aren't tied to commercial client server applications which rely on NT infrastructure. You aren't going to convince Windows based organisations that ReactOS is better because it's Windows that's Open Source if they have to reformat all their servers and workstations to e3fs and find their backup system needs to be swapped out, and Ghost doesn't work unless they pretend their workstations are Linux and their Emergency Repair CD treats it like Linux because then... they don't have enough incentive not to just switch to Linux and run Wine to get MS Office on the workstations.

If / when ReactOS runs on partitions created by Vista or Se7en (or what-ever comes next) and supports all those natty server tools that are so fussy over exactly what they are installed on, then you have your killer app. You fit your niche. You ARE the Open Source alternative to the Microsoft OS. And when people are making ReactOS based Emergency Repair discs for Windows your "brand awareness" goes exponential.

Until you can do that, use whatever you like to "fill the gap", but please make it very clear that it is a temporary... and e3fs with NT-like overlays could be a very "nice" temporary.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests