Hi,
On 9 Jun 2002, Nicholas Miell wrote:
> Note that there's nothing stopping you from unpacking the tarball in
> cygwin, with it's own (nicely contained, and not nearly as ugly) symlink
> hack.
That's a hack in the cygwin libc, isn't it? It's the lib which opens
another file instead of the original, isn't it?
> Don't forget NTFS,
NTFS isn't known to be well writable. Remember the oopses! (Sorry, NTFS
people, if I do you any wrong)
> SMBFS,
...requires the windows system to be up...
> ISO-9660,
...needs to be burned onto CD first...
> HPFS (if Windows still supports it...),
Not by default, I think.
> and plain old FAT.
...which looses long names, IIRC. That's not a choice of choice...
> There's also third-party support for NFS,
...which again requires the windows to be up and running...
> HFS,
...which also needs to be burned onto cd or stored somewhere else...
> VxFS and others.
...which needs to be put somewhere, too...
I think VFAT is really the only real flexible transport fs for
linux->windows.
Regards,
Thunder
--
German attitude becoming | Thunder from the hill at ngforever
rightaway popular: |
"Get outa my way, | free inhabitant not directly
for I got a mobile phone!" | belonging anywhere
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Jun 15 2002 - 22:00:15 EST