VectorLinux

The nuts and bolts => Installation & Updates => Topic started by: sa3atsky on June 17, 2007, 06:47:04 pm

Title: NTFS Hard disks Unidentified
Post by: sa3atsky on June 17, 2007, 06:47:04 pm
Hi, Ive installed Vector Linux to run as a storage server.. Vector is not identifying any of the NTFS partitions formatted hence rendering it useless... When I try installing the NTFS device driver from the package manager it tells me download failed although my network is configured perfectly..
Could this be because of my GRUB config? (http://www.vectorlinux.com/forum2/index.php?topic=3378.0) coz it wouldnt configure so I was booting through the install cd by typing: "linux root=dev/sdb1 ro"..  Please help
Title: Re: NTFS Hard disks Unidentified
Post by: bigpaws on June 17, 2007, 07:26:00 pm
Your post is not clear. Is it that you formated your disks with
NTFS and Vector will not install to that disk, or you formatted
storage disks in NTFS and Vector can not access those disks.
Maybe you formatted NTFS partitions and are trying to use them?

Is this the same disk?

The storage server why NTFS? For a storage server you want
to use the native OS format, not a foreign format.

Bigpaws
Title: Re: NTFS Hard disks Unidentified
Post by: sa3atsky on June 17, 2007, 07:55:30 pm
Sorry, I have 3 hard disks
One has partition for Vector linux and for the Swap file and the rest is NTFS empty space.. The other two are also NTFS empty space
The OS only identifies the Vector Linux partition and none of the rest.

I chose NTFS because it is the most reliable and I only want to run files off the PC and I wont run files on it
Title: Re: NTFS Hard disks Unidentified
Post by: lagagnon on June 17, 2007, 10:32:45 pm
you need to edit your /etc/fstab file with the info posted in this FAQ: http://www.vectorlinux.com/forum2/index.php?topic=3127.0
Title: Re: NTFS Hard disks Unidentified
Post by: sa3atsky on June 17, 2007, 10:55:33 pm
lagagnon - amazing reply :) youve been great help, worked flawlessly
Title: Re: NTFS Hard disks Unidentified
Post by: sa3atsky on June 17, 2007, 11:29:50 pm
OH wait a second, no it didnt..
First of all it previews the files sometimes and doesnt later on I cant access the hard disks.... It all seems too buggy.. When I try to access the subfolders inside it tells me they dont exist.. I dont know whats the deal, am I doing anything wrong?

This is how my fstab is now configured:
Code: [Select]
# The Linux partitions
/dev/sdb1 / reiserfs  noatime  0  1
/dev/sdb2 /mnt/win ntfs-3g defaults,allow_other,umask=0,users,nls=utf8,noexec 0 0
/dev/sda1 /mnt/win ntfs-3g defaults,allow_other,umask=0,users,nls=utf8,noexec 0 0
/dev/sdc1 /mnt/win ntfs-3g defaults,allow_other,umask=0,users,nls=utf8,noexec 0 0
Title: Re: NTFS Hard disks Unidentified
Post by: The Headacher on June 18, 2007, 01:00:43 am
If your system is not going to use anything else than VL it doesn't make sense to use NTFS. NTFS might be the most secure in Windows, I'm pretty sure you're much better off using some Linux filesystem. I've used ReiserFS for quite a while, had some nasty hard lockups (my own bad), but the filesystem never got serious enough damage to loose files.
Title: Re: NTFS Hard disks Unidentified
Post by: bigpaws on June 18, 2007, 02:12:06 am
Even though there is NTFS support I would not really
call it stable. There are those that may argue the otherwise.

When it comes to keeping data is it worth the chance?

I found your other post. Apparently you have formatted the
partitions as NTFS to be used as samba shares.

There are many of us that will show you the direction if you ask.

Maybe a post of "I would like to setup a server to be a file server
what would you recommend". If the my guess is right and you are
going to use NTFS shares on Linux then expect failures in I/O and
read write errors.

This mgiht be a good place to start:

http://www.networkcomputing.com/unixworld/tutorial/013/013.part1.html (http://www.networkcomputing.com/unixworld/tutorial/013/013.part1.html)

Bigpaws
Title: Re: NTFS Hard disks Unidentified
Post by: lagagnon on June 18, 2007, 07:07:35 am
Your fstab file was edited incorrectly. You are attempting to mount different partitions to the same mount point when they are already in use. First you mount sdb2 to /mnt/win, then you attempt to mount sda1 to the same mountpoint and then sdc1.

I don't think you can do that. You will need a different mount point (e.g. /mnt/win1) for each partition.
Title: Re: NTFS Hard disks Unidentified
Post by: sa3atsky on June 18, 2007, 09:37:49 am
The reason I got VectorLinux is ive read it has native NTFS support. But it turns out its so buggy even Ubuntu has better support from what I've experienced.. It's no problem though, I like the OS so much I'm willing to convert unless ofcourse theres a risk of losing data.

Even though there is NTFS support I would not really
call it stable. There are those that may argue the otherwise.

When it comes to keeping data is it worth the chance?

I found your other post. Apparently you have formatted the
partitions as NTFS to be used as samba shares.

There are many of us that will show you the direction if you ask.

Maybe a post of "I would like to setup a server to be a file server
what would you recommend". If the my guess is right and you are
going to use NTFS shares on Linux then expect failures in I/O and
read write errors.

This mgiht be a good place to start:

http://www.networkcomputing.com/unixworld/tutorial/013/013.part1.html (http://www.networkcomputing.com/unixworld/tutorial/013/013.part1.html)

Bigpaws

I've read this quite a while ago. The problem is I already have files in these hard disks.. Tell me, whats the best filesystem to convert to? and how do I do that now without any risk of losing valuable data?
Title: Re: NTFS Hard disks Unidentified
Post by: newt on June 18, 2007, 10:29:19 am
I believe that the support for NTFS writing/reading is satisfactory in VL and not as buggy as may be indicated - more likely your problems arise from improper configuration/mounting of drive/partitions.  I'm sure you could get your drives, formatted with NTFS, mounted and configured such that they'll work as you'd like them to.  However, unless these drives/partitions will be used to house a windows system (locally) then I cannot understand the reasoning.  You'll have better support using a native linux filesystem such as ReiserFS, which will provide you with journaling (data-loss protection) and better drive space usage - not to mention greatly increased performance due to the native aspect of the filesystem.

If your plan is a networked file server for these drives then NTFS will make no difference to the remote systems accessing the data - Windows will not "see" NTFS across the network, nor will it see ReiserFS.  It will interact with the data via a network file system such as nfs or smb.

Then again, maybe I've missed something ???
Title: Re: NTFS Hard disks Unidentified
Post by: rbistolfi on June 18, 2007, 10:42:47 am
Quote
The problem is I already have files in these hard disks.. Tell me, whats the best filesystem to convert to? and how do I do that now without any risk of losing valuable data?

hmm, may be I am wrong, but I think there is no way to change the filesystem without lose the data, you will need to backup those files. There is a nice recent post of GrannyGeek about how to buckup a hole disk, could be useful. You can use one disk to keep all the data, do the job with the others disks, and then copy the files from the last disk, and finally re-format the backup disk.
Title: Re: NTFS Hard disks Unidentified
Post by: MikeCindi on June 18, 2007, 10:53:17 am
.. It's no problem though, I like the OS so much I'm willing to convert unless ofcourse theres a risk of losing data.
...
The problem is I already have files in these hard disks.. Tell me, whats the best filesystem to convert to? and how do I do that now without any risk of losing valuable data?
You ask a couple of simple questions that have easy answers for someone who has already made up their mind about what to do. In your case you have not made up your mind so it becomes difficult and anxiety provoking. The first question (best FS) is largely a matter of circumstance and opinion. reiserFS has been suggested and indeed I would agree that it is a very (very) good choice when using VL. There are several good choices in VL. XFS might be a better choice if you are not planning to boot from the partition that it is used on and you are often moving very large files (>1Gb). As for your second question ext3 has a long and very stable history but is not as efficient as reiserFS or XFS. To "convert" is not possible. I only know of converting from ext2 to ext3 (and in the future ext4). Thus you would need to backup data on one disk, format it with your chosen FS, move data to that disk and then format the other with your chosen FS.

Using NTFS in linux is not well established yet and performance of such a FS is probably severely lacking at this time. Many, myself included have not had problems but the two were not designed for each other.
HTH,
Mike
Title: Re: NTFS Hard disks Unidentified
Post by: Joe1962 on June 18, 2007, 11:10:51 am
NTFS-3G works VERY well in VL, I use it every day and have been for a long time. Lagagnon hit the nail on the head when he said you were mounting 3 partitions on the same mountpoint. You need a different mountpoint for each one, maybe /mnt/win1, /mnt/win2, /mnt/win3. Just create those 3 directories and edit fstab accordingly, then reboot.
Title: Re: NTFS Hard disks Unidentified
Post by: lagagnon on June 18, 2007, 12:21:57 pm
NTFS-3G works VERY well in VL, I use it every day and have been for a long time..,
I can confirm that comment myself as well.
Title: Re: NTFS Hard disks Unidentified
Post by: GrannyGeek on June 18, 2007, 07:01:40 pm
ntfs-3g has been working well for me, too.
--GrannyGeek
Title: Re: NTFS Hard disks Unidentified
Post by: MikeCindi on August 10, 2007, 10:23:24 am
I found this on the nfts-3g site: http://www.ntfs-3g.org/performance.html. As I had stated in my earlier post the performance of an ntfs partition under linux was not an intended match like ext3 or reiserfs, etc. While the performance using ntfs-3g is pretty good, if you're designing a linux only system why choose that fs? As The Headacher said this may be good for Windows but not linux.
FWIW,
Mike