Using the Real ntfs.sys Driver Under Linux 548
caseih writes "A very neat hack uses the real ntfs.sys driver (obtained from your own windows XP partition and used via a wine-like layer (borrowed from ReactOS) to mount an ntfs partion with full read/write access. While not an ideal solution and certainly not free as in speech, this is an ideal stop-gap measure for many people trying out linux. I think that we'll probably see this in Knoppix pretty soon."
OK... good (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:OK... good (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:OK... good (Score:2)
Re:OK... good (Score:2)
Daniel
Re:OK... good (Score:3, Informative)
Re:OK... good (Score:5, Informative)
"The only supported operation is overwriting existing files, without changing the file length. No file or directory creation, deletion or renaming is possible. Note only non-resident files can be written to so you may find that some very small files (500 bytes or so) cannot be written to."
Maybe using the windows NTFS driver this way will help provide enough debug info to complete this driver
Re:OK... good (Score:3, Interesting)
It is clearly always possible using simple methods (unless M$ do really stupid things with the disk format, and then it would break on some disks and/or controllers) to read what is on the disk, using Linux, or for that matter an old version of Norton Utilities (when there really were useful utilities). There is no shortage of people who could run simple fi
Re:OK... good (Score:3, Interesting)
Get people converted to an open filesystem, I say.
Re:OK... good (Score:5, Insightful)
I do appreciate the difficulties the kernel team have had with this, it is not their fault that they have to work with an undocumented closed-source file system.
The strange thing about all this is that very many different OSs which have existed over the years have had some capability to read and write "foreign" file systems, either built in or as a third-party driver. Certainly it is standard with Linux, *BSD, even the hated SCO, also MAC in most of its variants, Amiga, Atari, Solaris....... Even many 8-bit computers could read a variety of foreign file systems. The one name missing is M$, absolutely none of their stuff recognises any othe OS at all. (Please correct me if I am wrong!) It is as if Bill arrogantly imagines that there are only Windoze PCs in this universe. The fact is that there are many things that can't be done under Windoze, but are relatively easy under some other OS. Maybe the reverse is true also, but I can't think of an example. It is absolutely normal in this day and age, even without open source, to need to read and write foreign file systems. The one obstacle is the Chief Hacker of Redmond, he will neither interface to other people's file systems (despite having the documentation, and most drivers under BSD licence) nor will he let anyone else do it by denying proper access to his documentation.
One day, when the masses wake up to what they have been denied since Messy-DOS 1, he may realise that his monopolistic actions have in fact shot himself in both feet.
Re:OK... good (Score:3, Insightful)
Ah, while there are certainly quite a few people out there who want to read and write multiple filesystems, I'd hardly call it "normal". "Normal" is something my grandma or a secretary does with their computer.
Re:OK... good (Score:2)
Re:OK... good (Score:4, Interesting)
-
Re:OK... good (Score:4, Insightful)
Mount the NFTS partition you want write access to using the OSS read-only version,
read the winnt/system32/ntfs.sys driver into memory or RAM-disk,
remount it using the method described in the article.
This way, Knoppix (or whichever distro implements this) wouldn't have to include the EULA-protected M$ driver. Its as legal as any other WINE-like use of existing, O/S-speicific DLLs and drivers.
Obviously, this wouldn't work for NTFS partitions that don't have an actual NT-based O/S installed on it, but if that's the case, why do you have that partition on your HD in the first place?!
Re:OK... good (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:OK... good (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:OK... good (Score:3, Informative)
Wine is actually fast because it ISN'T an emulator, it's an implementation of Win32 on Linux, and ReactOS isn't an emulator either, so in both cases, you'd get pretty close (if not actual) native-speed performance.
You WOULD get a hit on memory consumption though, those modules need RAM, certainly.
Re:OK... good (Score:5, Informative)
The oft-repeated tagline "Wine is not an emulator" is false. It would only be true if the word "emulator" meant "hardware emulator".
It does not. Although most people think of CPU virtualization when they hear the word "emulator", that is not necessarily the case. According to dictionary definitions, WINE is emphatically an emulator.
Here's the defintion:
Re:OK... good (Score:5, Funny)
Re:OK... good (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:OK... good (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:OK... good (Score:3, Funny)
Of course Wine has an emulation layer. What do you think it does when an application calls a win32api function... calls up Redmond and asks what to do?
Re:The simple fact of the matter is... (Score:3, Insightful)
That should be sending me a flag that this is just a troll or flamebait, but I'm biting anyway. I don't have the money to buy an extra machine so I can run Linux and my wife can run Windows. And I'm not such a zealot as to make her use Linux for tasks that she finds easier in Windows. There is no Photoshop for Linux, and the only legal ways to run Photoshop in Linux end up meaning I have to have a copy of Windows. (VMWare + Windows, Bochs + Windows, Wine + Windows DLLs). So if I'm a
I'm not sure if we'll see it in knoppix (Score:5, Interesting)
Hackeroo! (Score:2, Redundant)
Re:I'm not sure if we'll see it in knoppix (Score:5, Interesting)
Use the copy off the hard drive. Mount it in read-only using the normal way, copy it to the Knoppix ramdrive, and then run the driver from there.
Re:I'm not sure if we'll see it in knoppix (Score:5, Insightful)
I was thinking exactly the same, but there might be a way around that. Knoppix just have to contain the wrapper code, the actual
Re:I'm not sure if we'll see it in knoppix (Score:5, Interesting)
Um... I'm wondering here: How does Windows load ntfs.sys from an NTFS partition???
Re:I'm not sure if we'll see it in knoppix (Score:5, Informative)
Probably the same way OS/2 loaded HPFS.IFS on HPFS partitions. The boot kernel had some kind of micro-HPFS driver that allowed the system access to certain folders on the HPFS partition, allowing it to load necessary drivers.
Re:I'm not sure if we'll see it in knoppix (Score:5, Informative)
Re:I'm not sure if we'll see it in knoppix (Score:5, Informative)
NTLDR contains a mini-NTFS filesystem driver and mini registry parser. NTLDR reads the registry and determines all of the boot-start device drivers. NTLDR loads those drivers into RAM, then loads the kernel and the HAL.
NTLDR then passes control of the machine to the kernel, along with a pointer to the in-RAM loaded drivers so that the kernel can start those drivers.
Re:I'm not sure if we'll see it in knoppix (Score:4, Funny)
It's like the computer pulls itself up by it's own boot straps.
Re:I'm not sure if we'll see it in knoppix (Score:2, Interesting)
But the NTFS driver would be on the Windows partition, which would be an NTFS filesystem - right?
So presumably the setup looks like this:
Seems to me that either just "stealing" the ntfs.sys driver (wonder if it gets changed by different service packs?) or using the normal kernel one would be far easier.
But then again I don't use Windows so I have no
Re:I'm not sure if we'll see it in knoppix (Score:5, Informative)
Re:I'm not sure if we'll see it in knoppix (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I'm not sure if we'll see it in knoppix (Score:3, Informative)
Boot Knoppix, a Gentoo LiveCD, or somesuch other Linux that's runn
Re:I'm not sure if we'll see it in knoppix (Score:2)
Re:I'm not sure if we'll see it in knoppix (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I'm not sure if we'll see it in knoppix (Score:4, Insightful)
If you need NTFS-support you already have it on your harddrive, so no problems taking it right off the disk.
First? (Score:5, Insightful)
Surely that would be ReactOS, where he got a lot of the code from.
But still, so it begind. First NDIS drivers now FS drivers. Next up it will be a GDI wrapper for X so you can use Windows binary drivers with your graphics card.
All of this is a complete waste of time though. When did Open Source simply become a way to avoid paying for Windows?
Re:First? (Score:2)
When windows became the dominant operating system.
Re:First? (Score:2)
I think Open Source was more a way of having access to your materials the way you need to. Chances are if you want to read/write an NTFS partition, you've got a machine running Windows, or accessing something that Windows has been working with.
Grow up.
In other news... (Score:5, Funny)
You hit it... (Score:5, Insightful)
Knoppix (Score:5, Interesting)
I wonder how it's going to be done in Knoppix, without distributing a commercial DLL with the CD. Perhaps the following scheme could work:
Tricky. Depends on having the DLL somewhere on the disk.
-- Arik
Re:Knoppix (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Knoppix (Score:5, Interesting)
> 1. Look for NTFS partitions and mount them with the R/O driver
> 2. Scan those folders for the dll and copy it into the ramdisk
mount -t ntfs
if (-e
{
cp
}
umount
if (-e
{
# Do Wrapper voodoo here.
}
Doesn't seem to conceptually hard (or tricky) to me.
the tricky part (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Not really (Score:4, Insightful)
Then again, that kind of trick is always described as 'easy' as well, so I guess credit isn't being given. Though if it were so easy, you'd think Microsoft might be doing a bit more of it, no?
look at the windows boot loader (Score:2, Interesting)
so knoppix can probably find out where windows is installed by examining the bootloader for windows. i believe it points to the windows installation directory (which device, directory, etc.).
Fsckin' Great... (Score:2, Insightful)
BTW How did people get around this issue before Read/Write access to NTFS? Did they have a FAT32 partition or something that both of the OS installations shared? I never took too much time to look into it because it wasn't too much of a problem for me.
--D3X
Re:Fsckin' Great... (Score:2)
Re:Fsckin' Great... (Score:5, Informative)
Linux is my primary O/S. I only use Windows to uhh... well... I'm not sure what I use it for since I haven't booted to it in a couple of months. But I still have it on another partition.
Anyway - I have my external Firewire drives formatted as EXT3 and I use Mount Everything [mount-everything.com] to read/write to them under Windows. Not a free program though.
This is another solution [swin.edu.au] you can try for reading/writing to Linux partitions under Windows. This one IS free.
And one final idea [ntfs-linux.com], also not free - and probably rendered obsolete by today's announcement of this Captive project - but it's another source never the less. This is for reading/writing to NTFS partitions under Linux.
I'd like to give credit to the people who pointed out these links to me but it was a long time ago and I don't remember who they were.
How about the other way around (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:How about the other way around (Score:5, Informative)
Explore2fs [swin.edu.au]
Re:How about the other way around (Score:2)
The driver to mount them is pretty much alpha and not really useful, but there's an explorer-like app that allows you to access e2fs files without really mounting the volume (i.e. it's not system-wide accessible, you can just export/import files) and it works quite OK. I don't remember the names, STFW "access ext2 from FAT" or similar
Re:How about the other way around (Score:5, Informative)
For Windows NT 4.0 [tripod.com]
For Windows 95 [demon.co.uk]
For Windows NT/2000/XP [sourceforge.net]
For DOS, Windows 95/98/NT/2000/XP, OS/2, BeOS, MacOS... [penguin.cz]
Re:How about the other way around (Score:4, Insightful)
What about users/permissions? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:What about users/permissions? (Score:2)
Why wuold you install Linux, and then go ahead and mount what will essentially end up being a world-writeable volume? Other than for emergency or migration purposes, this makes no sense to me at all.
usual M$ boasts are empty. (Score:2)
Such boasts are obviously proved empty by full read write access from a boot disk. If you want to perpetuate Microsoft's insecure, performance lame and unportable database tables of files and users for permisions, you will have to buy into Microsoft's Next Generation rootkit, aka Longhorn, with a cripled bios motherboard and explosives on the hard disk. If you thi
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:What about users/permissions? (Score:3, Insightful)
That horse has been out of the barn for years. Once I have physical access to a computer, I can boot from an NTFSDOS floppy or CDROM and ignore all NTFS security.
This doesn't make things less secure. It may remind people that without physical security, there is no data security.
Re:What about users/permissions? (Score:3, Interesting)
"Secret" software is a real problem for OSS (Score:4, Interesting)
I wonder... (Score:4, Insightful)
From what i've read about WinFS, a *nix 'version' would be quite nice.
Already in the works, chum. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:I wonder... (Score:2)
Useful (Score:5, Interesting)
How stable? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:How stable? (Score:2)
The authors claim the new driver works for read/write, and is stable. I don't dual boot myself, so I haven't tested it, but there seems to be a solution that's not a hack.
Re:How stable? (Score:5, Funny)
Man, talk about setting your expectations low....
To all the "can't go in Knoppix" posters (Score:5, Insightful)
It would be perfectly legal for Knoppix to *know* that you might have an NTFS.SYS around on your computer, look around to see whether this is the case, and if it is, use your own copy NTFS.SYS.
Of course, Knoppix will never itself be packaged with the NTFS.SYS. But if you have an NTFS partition, you have a damn good chance of having an NT around as well, with the driver right in there.
I can only hope that MS doesn't insert some nastiness into the NTFS.SYS that would prevent it from running inside the framework described in TFA.
HTH
Not 'free as in speech', but rather (Score:4, Interesting)
as a knoppix user, I hope to hell this stays WAY AWAY. Microsoft has published a good deal of api's for writing device drivers; it would be a better idea to develop OSS device drivers that allow read/write access to ext2/ext3/reiserfs filesystems instead.
Would be better legally, as well.
MOD PARENT UP (Score:2)
Re:MOD PARENT UP (Score:3, Interesting)
I would like to see ext3 for XP, and UFS too. Windows JFFS2 drivers for removable smartmedia would be nice too, but these things are a bitch to port. Ideally, you'll have a full debug (checked) build of XP and a second XP machine to run a kernel debugger on. One mistake in IFS code and
Re:Not 'free as in speech', but rather (Score:3, Insightful)
Writing ext/reiser drivers for windows would fulfil a different niche, (linux user switching to windows perhaps?). This is intended for windows users, who already have ntfs filesystems, switching to linux.
Another legal way to deal with the driver (Score:5, Informative)
Optimally, like the other suggestions, this driver should be moved during config time, but I would be willing to load it my USB doohickey prior to booting Knoppix/Mandrake Live/whatevernix.
I have valid Windows NT/2000/XP licenses on my machine, or I wouldn't have the NTFS partition to begin with. Maybe that's not a guaranteed assumption, and IANAL, but I don't think it would put too many MS lawyers on alert if it were done that way.
Perhaps a copyright/license file stating "These files are to be used on computer systems with valid Windows NT/2000/XP licenses only." when they are copied to the USB Key.
Call me crazy but... (Score:2, Interesting)
This would be very handy to me, since I use XP for Video / Photo Editing, Gaming, and Linux for everything else.
Am I crazy? Is this crazy talk? Why not give users the option to use Ext3, RiserFS, NTFS, etc all on the same page?
It ain't free if it requires ms-windows (Score:3, Interesting)
If the "Captive" (?) NTFS project needs the original MS driver it might also be illegal, and plain useless when there's no ms-windows around but only data to be rescued.
Anyways, if this project scratches someone's itches then who cares - go for it. At least one can always try pulling stuff like this under the open source skies. Try retrofitting ms-windows with non-ms-sanctioned FS support... now there's a challenge!
bah. i hate these. non-x86 users suffer. (Score:5, Insightful)
it satisfys much of the normal x86 crowd which means development of the real driver suffers.
What about NT4 for non-x86 users? (Score:3, Interesting)
Would these drivers, assuming you have an NT4 disk gathering dust, be a solution for non x86 users?
Not much help if you run Linux on ARM or 68k or something but there you go.
Re:What about NT4 for non-x86 users? (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't think MIPS or PPC made it to NT4. Alpha died early in NT4 cycle, maybe a service pack or two. You're looking at very old technology. This still looks like x86 only.
Re:What about NT4 for non-x86 users? (Score:3, Informative)
Supporting Links:
http://www.microsoft.com/ntserver/nts/dow
(Notice the inclusion of an DEC Alpha download for SP6 for NT4)
http://home1.gte.net/res008nh/nt/ppc/ntfaq.htm
J
Personally (Score:3, Interesting)
NTFSDOS (Score:4, Informative)
What about Mac Users? (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm not sure if you realize it, but there is no easy solution for using an external hard drive over 32gb with multiple platforms.
As of this driver, it appears that NTFS is probably the best way to do this, as it now has Linux support.
Windows or MacOS don't support Ext3 natively, and the 3rd party drivers are slow. Fat32 has a 32gb limit. Mac HFS+ can't be read by Windows.
How easy could it be to write an NTFS driver for OS X?
Re:What is this good for? (Score:5, Insightful)
In any case, your friend probably has a bunch of files on his Windows partition (likely NTFS formatted) that he wants to see if he can edit/view in Linux. If he can do what he wants, then switching to Linux becomes an option. So, with this, his NTFS partition is available and everything just works(TM). After all, your friend doesn't even know what NTFS is, but he does know when he can't get at his files.
In short, this makes transitions to Linux much smoother. People shouldn't have to keep a copy of a file on both partitions just so its available in both environmets. It becomes a pain to figure out which document is the most recent, etc. etc. And, BTW, I'm talking about the average user who doesn't have a network drive.
Re:What is this good for? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Linux File System? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Linux File System? (Score:2)
Apologies (Score:2)
Go ahead and mod my original post down.
Re:Linux File System? (Score:2)
ext3 [sourceforge.net]
Resier/Resier4 [namesys.com]
JFS [ibm.com]
XFS [sgi.com]
Re:Linux File System? (Score:4, Informative)
No, it doesn't. Linux supports a wide range of journalling file systems: ext3, JFS, ReiserFS, XFS, in addition to almost any filesystem known to man, INCLUDING native NTFS [sourceforge.net]
Shouldn't Linux be on something "better" than FAT32
It is.
You got your facts wrong, that's all.
Re:Linux File System? (Score:2)
Re:Linux File System? (Score:3, Informative)
Linux does NOT run on FAT32 as a native file system. It has options of EXT2, EXT3 (EXT2 + journaling), ReiserFS, XFS (from SGI), JFS (from IBM) and probably quite a few more. Yes, you could probably make it run from FAT32, if you tried.
EXT2 is similar to FAT32, whereas the others are similar in concept to NTFS -- journaling, ACLs, etc. Each has its own benefit.
Re:Linux File System? (Score:3, Insightful)
Linux has support for dozens of other operating systems' filesystems such as FAT32 and NTFS from Windows, JFS from IBMs OS/2 and AIX, XFS from SGIs Irix, as well as several developed specifically for Linux - such as ext2, ext3, and reiserfs.
Of all the filesystems available for Linux, XFS is probably the most advanced of any mainstream operating system in the world, with far mor
Re:Linux File System? (Score:3, Insightful)
Umm, no. Linux can read/write FAT32 filesystems, but typically it is installed on ext2 or ext3 filesystems. Or XFS, or Reiser, or JFS, or.... Basically, anything which supports Unix-like permissions. Does anyone still use the old Minix filesystem?
In theory I guess you could install it on FAT32, but it would be horribly insecure and very kludgey since FAT32 won't support permissions, symlinks
Re:See this in Knoppix real soon... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Hack? (Score:4, Informative)
I suggest that you read here
http://www.jargon.8hz.com/jargon_23.html#SEC30
shame on you
nick
Re:You need to get ntfs.sys legally somehow (Score:3, Informative)
Just FYI; the codec DLLs aren't distributable free of charge either.