| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
HecHacker1
Apprentice
Joined: 26 Jun 2003
Posts: 213
Location: UCSD
|
 Posted: Mon Jul 19, 2004 6:59 am Post subject: |
 |
|
I also have this error.
| Code: | Speed root # mount -t captive-ntfs /dev/sda1 /winxp
Captive NTFS v1.1.5. Check a new version at: http://www.jankratochvil.net/
could not parse options!
|
Can anybody help. I followed the ebuild instructions on the gentoo bug page. I need captive so I can fix and delete my NTFS partitions. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
focahclero
Guru
Joined: 02 Jan 2004
Posts: 554
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 09, 2004 11:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
A late response...
| dagonarth wrote: | Hello. I have strange error when I try to mount ntfs partition:
I do it with mount -t captive-ntfs /dev/* /mnt/* without any errors on console. But when I try to ls /mnt/* this error appears ls: reading directory /mnt/System/: Operation not permitted.
|
In my case the solution was to use the wXP drivers instead the w2k drivers.
In a post in Captive mail list: | Code: | Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 20:28:59 +0100
From: Jan Kratochvil <rcpt-captive-list.AT.jankratochvil.net@jankratochvil.net>
To: captive-list@jankratochvil.net
Subject: Re: new user problems
(...)
* Which driver version do you use? Currently only MS-Windows XP drivers
are supported. Drivers from MS-Windows 2000 are currently not compatible.
(...) |
_________________
focahclero
Registered Linux User #352648. Get Counted! http://counter.li.org
[TEMA] Descripción problema (estado) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kevdoig
Apprentice
Joined: 03 May 2004
Posts: 171
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 19, 2004 9:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
Anyone got this working well enough to give some benchmarks times for reading/writing files, just to see how slow it is compared to the kernel drier (i know only the read is comparable)
Last edited by kevdoig on Wed Aug 25, 2004 2:35 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
HecHacker1
Apprentice
Joined: 26 Jun 2003
Posts: 213
Location: UCSD
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2004 3:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
i finally got it working, but I didn't use the portage ebuild. I just went to the captive ntfs homepage and installed it from there.
As far as reading and writing performance, it is a okay in terms of file transfer performance, but when you have to do a lot of work with small files, it lags a lot. The kernel NTFS drivers doesn't have this problem, in fact i think it's even faster than XP's ntfs performance.
The process will also randomly crash on me when I delete or do a copy of a lot of files at any one time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
A-star
n00b
Joined: 05 Jun 2002
Posts: 43
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 15, 2004 1:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Just a quick question,
Let's say for reading a file from a NTFS partition I use the driver in the kernel.
And for writing to it I use Captive.
Can you easily switch between the two of them?
I was thinking of setting up mountpoints which are not activated automatically but have to be activated by hand, but they are pointing to the same mountpoint (/mnt/ntfsdrive) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kevdoig
Apprentice
Joined: 03 May 2004
Posts: 171
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2004 6:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| as far as i can see, should work fine, (will probably have to remount to write??) but seems to be a different (i.e mount captive-ntfs) to mount using captive driver. so mounting as regular NTFS, should mount as kernel NTFS driver. I would try, but i don't have net connection to emerge captive at the moment. post if you get it working |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
A-star
n00b
Joined: 05 Jun 2002
Posts: 43
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2004 7:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
Will do but it will take some time, have to build a new test rig for that.
I'm not going to experiment with anything on my regular computer. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kevdoig
Apprentice
Joined: 03 May 2004
Posts: 171
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2004 10:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| you could maybe just make a little NTFS partition to play with. lol, i wouldn't use my working system for this, but when i have a connection, i usually have 2 setups, one to test things, and one to fix everything that i've broken and actually get a little work done |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
slycordinator
Advocate
Joined: 31 Jan 2004
Posts: 3065
Location: Korea
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 25, 2004 7:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| kevdoig wrote: | | Anyone got this working well enough to give some benchmarks times for reading/writing files, just to see how slow it is compared to the kernel drier (i know only the read is comparable) |
Writing is EXTREMELY SLOW using captive. I don't have any benchmarks but when I tried to copy a pretty large executable I needed for windows and tried to write it to my nfts drive it took so long that I cancelled it thinking it had hung. I ended up just using a program I forgot I had in windows for accessing reiserfs partitions and copied the file over in no time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mahir
l33t
Joined: 05 Dec 2003
Posts: 725
Location: London
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 05, 2004 7:30 pm Post subject: mmm |
|
|
can someone send me the link for a propper working ebuild set please?
i think i need the captive and captive-lufs thing..
thank you kindly
_________________
"wa ma tawfiqi illah billah"
Mahir Sayar |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
slycordinator
Advocate
Joined: 31 Jan 2004
Posts: 3065
Location: Korea
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 06, 2004 2:27 am Post subject: Re: mmm |
|
|
| mahir wrote: | can someone send me the link for a propper working ebuild set please?
i think i need the captive and captive-lufs thing..
thank you kindly |
You'll have to patch your kernel to have lufs support built in.
Then you can emerge lufs and the rest should be pretty basic I think. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gentree
Watchman
Joined: 01 Jul 2003
Posts: 5350
Location: France, Old Europe
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 09, 2004 1:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Second, even if Microsoft's NTFS code was leaked, it would be both illegal and immoral to use it. |
Illegal , maybe, I'm not a lawyer. Illagal like illegal monopolies or illegally incorporating other companies disk compression utilities into your product and selling millions of unlicenced copies.
Immoral, like killing DR-DOS by ensuring win3.1 mysteriously did not work on it (yeah that's going back a way but immoral practice is not new to Redmond) or paying a 3rd party to mount unfounded law-suits to undermine confidence in Linux.....
do I need to continue? Get real! 
Anyway, ro is enough if you need to access any old documents . I dont see any pressing need for write access except it would be nice to beable to resize NT partitions from Linux.
_________________
Linux, because I'd rather own a free OS than steal one that's not worth paying for.
Gentoo because I'm a masochist
AthlonXP-M on A7N8X. Portage ~x86 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
slycordinator
Advocate
Joined: 31 Jan 2004
Posts: 3065
Location: Korea
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 11, 2004 3:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Gentree wrote: |
Illegal , maybe, I'm not a lawyer. Illagal like illegal monopolies or illegally incorporating other companies disk compression utilities into your product and selling millions of unlicenced copies. |
It would be illegal for you to take code that's been copyrighted by microsoft. Taking their code would be similar to plagarizing from someone for a book you're writing. It's one thing to use a program as an idea for making a similar one. It's another to take their code.
| Quote: | | Immoral, like killing DR-DOS by ensuring win3.1 mysteriously did not work on it (yeah that's going back a way but immoral practice is not new to Redmond) or paying a 3rd party to mount unfounded law-suits to undermine confidence in Linux..... |
Can you please differentiate between win3.1 being "ensured that it won't work on DR-DOS" and win3.1 being written using features that DR-DOS didn't support?
Lots of times someone writes a program that runs in Linux and since Linux is similar to BSD (unix) you'd think that the program should run in BSD. But then you find it doesn't. Does that mean the author "ensured that it won't work in BSD"? This is very similar to the win3.1 only running in MS-DOS.
| Quote: | | Anyway, ro is enough if you need to access any old documents . I dont see any pressing need for write access except it would be nice to beable to resize NT partitions from Linux. |
You already can resize NTFS partitions in linux without having write access. "emerge ntfsprogs" and then do "man ntfsresize" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kow
Apprentice
Joined: 28 Dec 2003
Posts: 227
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 11, 2004 6:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
Eh im not going to do this, I'd rather not use things that are not being maintained anymore - such as LUFS.
_________________
-Kow |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
slycordinator
Advocate
Joined: 31 Jan 2004
Posts: 3065
Location: Korea
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 11, 2004 7:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| That's why it sounds like the author is trying to do an fuse-based implementation. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gentree
Watchman
Joined: 01 Jul 2003
Posts: 5350
Location: France, Old Europe
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 15, 2004 2:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | You already can resize NTFS partitions in linux without having write access. "emerge ntfsprogs" and then do "man ntfsresize" |
Thanks , I have ntfsprogs but was not aware of the resize.
Do you have any direct experience as to it's reliability?
I have done this with PM8 which has the advantage of displacing files that NT defrag leaves high up the partition despite several GIGS of free space.
Obviously the Linux tools cant move the files so some techniques will be needed to move down the files if there is not enough clear space at the end of the NT partion.
That notwithstanding , anyone got any feedback on ntfsresize?
Thx
_________________
Linux, because I'd rather own a free OS than steal one that's not worth paying for.
Gentoo because I'm a masochist
AthlonXP-M on A7N8X. Portage ~x86 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rezza
Guru
Joined: 09 Apr 2003
Posts: 434
Location: Edinburgh, UK
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 15, 2004 3:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Gentree wrote: | | Quote: | | You already can resize NTFS partitions in linux without having write access. "emerge ntfsprogs" and then do "man ntfsresize" |
Thanks , I have ntfsprogs but was not aware of the resize.
Do you have any direct experience as to it's reliability?
I have done this with PM8 which has the advantage of displacing files that NT defrag leaves high up the partition despite several GIGS of free space.
Obviously the Linux tools cant move the files so some techniques will be needed to move down the files if there is not enough clear space at the end of the NT partion.
That notwithstanding , anyone got any feedback on ntfsresize?
Thx |
It works, but as you said its pretty much helpless if there are fragments of files in the area you want to free up (assuming you're shrinking the partition). I remember once when I tried to use it, I had to run a defragger about 5 times in windows before ntfsresize would do its job.
_________________
screenshots
blog |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gentree
Watchman
Joined: 01 Jul 2003
Posts: 5350
Location: France, Old Europe
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 15, 2004 4:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks,
there are probably some NT/XP tools to do a real defrag, ie defrag the used area rather than just the individual files.
I managed to do it enough by moving large directories to and from another partition until I realised PM8 could move things down for me.
Now to try and slip Gentoo in above XP and give the machine back.
_________________
Linux, because I'd rather own a free OS than steal one that's not worth paying for.
Gentoo because I'm a masochist
AthlonXP-M on A7N8X. Portage ~x86 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
slycordinator
Advocate
Joined: 31 Jan 2004
Posts: 3065
Location: Korea
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 15, 2004 5:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yeah, as mentioned you have to make sure that your NTFS partition has VERY LOW FRAGMENTATION before the resizer can work.
I'd reccommend using something like diskkeeper for that as it's pretty much the best windows-based defrag tool I've ever seen. But it's not free either. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
irgu
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 25 Apr 2003
Posts: 131
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2004 1:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
Ntfsresize do move files safely and it doesn't need defragmentation at all for about a year: http://mlf.linux.rulez.org/mlf/ezaz/ntfsresize.html#fragmented
Almost all distro use this more advanced version, including my Gentoo 
It's completely reliable but it won't resize the partition, only NTFS. The partition must be resized separately and that's very error-prone depending on the partitioning software. See the above URL for tips, my favourites are fdisk and QTParted from the Gentoo based SystemRescueCD: http://www.sysresccd.org/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
genstef
Retired Dev
Joined: 13 Jun 2004
Posts: 668
Location: M/Bay/Germany
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 28, 2004 4:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The instructions on the first page of this post are outdated, captive needs som e modifications to the GUI code to work again, but there is currently no maintainer for captive.
see:
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32929#c65 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
alienvenom
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 12 Jan 2005
Posts: 123
Location: San Francisco, CA
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 16, 2005 12:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I didn't follow Ahri's instructions (though I probably should) but I'd like to see where this route takes me.
I emerged captive without gnome support. (Is it really necessary for httpcaptive to be installed for gnome to view the directory?) I copied the necessary files (though it only said ntfs.sys and ntoskrnl.exe) and mounted it.
| Code: | | mount -t captive-ntfs /dev/hda6 /mnt/shared/ |
Captive NTFS v1.1.5. Check a new version at: http://www.jankratochvil.net/
(I assume the above is normal. Yes, hda6 is the NTFS partition I want to mount.)
When I navigate into the /mnt/shared folder, however, and type "ls" (after mounting it), I get the following error message:
ls: .: Transport endpoint is not connected
Is this because lufs (or whatever) is not installed? Should I "emerge lufs"? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
genstef
Retired Dev
Joined: 13 Jun 2004
Posts: 668
Location: M/Bay/Germany
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 16, 2005 12:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Looks like you have Service Pack 2, the driver currently only works with service pack 1. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
alienvenom
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 12 Jan 2005
Posts: 123
Location: San Francisco, CA
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 17, 2005 1:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| That makes sense why it pointed me to the SP1 update then... I saw the two files and put in my slipstreamed XPSP2 CD. Silly me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
soya
Guru
Joined: 29 Jan 2004
Posts: 429
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 17, 2005 9:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
so if a recieve this error is because i'm using the wrong ntoskrnl.exe and ntfs.sys?
I can mount it without problems, but then the mountpoitn dissapears and reappears again after unmounting it. If i do ls "/path/2/mountpint get the following error". Nothing shown n dmesg.
I got it from a xp+sp1 cd i have an still getting that error (This is the translation i did from spanish ):
| Code: |
Transport endpoint become connected
|
I can't run "captive-install-acquire", i don't have it command. I've installed captive like this: ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="~x86" USE="-gtk +static" emerge captive
_________________
Si el tonto te alaba laméntalo, si el listo te censura piénsalo. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Other Things Gentoo
