Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2002 19:38:51 -0600 From: "John Nielsen" <stable@jnielsen.net> To: <freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG>, "Mike Hogsett" <hogsett@csl.sri.com> Subject: Re: NTFS (ntfs.ko) Message-ID: <069701c21344$3cd3c2d0$0900a8c0@max> References: <200206140019.g5E0J1U70705@axp.csl.sri.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Hogsett" <hogsett@csl.sri.com> To: <freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG> Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2002 6:19 PM Subject: NTFS (ntfs.ko) > > We are about to receive some (sensitive) data on possibly an NTFS > filesystem (we are receiving a disk) that we will be performing some > batch processing on. > > I am curious how stable the NTFS support is in FreeBSD 4.5-RELEASE-p6. > > My current plan is to mount the disk read only and copy the data onto the > host's local disk. > > Is ntfs.ko stable enough, or should I but the disk in a Windows box and > tranfer it across the network instead? The NTFS code is quite stable--I've used it on a couple different machines. I seem to recall reading about a case where not all the files on the filesystem were visible when mounted under FreeBSD, but I can't remember where now. Transferring the files across the network is certainly the safest option, and you have the added benefit of being able to write to the filesystem that way as well. Personally (working under the only slightly-untrue notion that FreeBSD can do anything), I'd do it under FreeBSD first and only go to the Windows/network option if you had trouble accessing anything. It should be fast, stable, and a boost for your ego. :) JN To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?069701c21344$3cd3c2d0$0900a8c0>