On Thu, 30 Nov 2006, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Nov 2006, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> > I have not the faintest idea what was wrong before. [...] to my surprise
> > it now made Vista work. Why - no idea, and I could not care less.
>
> So, you have no idea of
>
> - what was wrong before
Yes.
> - why ntfsresize works on your Vista now
Yes.
> - internal knowledge of ntfsresize
I have quite a bit now that I have looked at it.
> - what are the impacts of your change
I understand the impact 100% which is why my patch is so big. It had to
touch a lot of utilities to adapt for the changed libntfs behaviour.
> but you would still make a new "stable" release. For me, these aren't very
> solid and convincing technically at all.
It works. As soon as Frans or others have confirmed that ntfsresize now
works for them also that is quite good enough for me.
> My plan was to make an urgent release which would have included only the
> denial of the Vista NTFS resizing, based on what I've suggested earlier.
> Then there would have been enough time to investigate what's going on when
> Vista becomes publicly available.
How would you tell if it is a Vista partition or not? How do you know
that the partition you are resizing is not going to be attached to a Vista
machine next? Impossible to know if you ask me.
> But this is your project, and of course you can do whatever you want.
> Recently you messed up ntfsclone and now ntfsresize. Nothing I could do
> about these, unfortunately. The responsibility is yours from now because
> obviously I can't support code I disagree with and even you don't understand
> why it works.
This is ridiculous. Grow up. I have neither messed up ntfsclone nor
ntfsresize. You just can't cope with the idea that someone touches code
you have written...
Both work perfectly after my changes and better than they did before.
Just because you perhaps cannot understand the fixes/improvements does not
mean they are messed up. Show me examples of what my changes have broken
that was not broken to start with and I will take my words back and
personally remove my patches.
Anyway, be my guest. Revert my fixes and fix them in a different/better
way. I could not care less. As long as the bugs are gone. But please do
not touch any of the libntfs/utilities other than ntfsresize/ntfsclone in
the process, i.e. please work within the framework of the improved/fixed
libntfs. If you want the old behaviour of libntfs back then supply
NTFS_MNT_FORENSIC to ntfs_mount() and libntfs will not write anything to
the volume during the mount process, i.e. it will not clear the journal
and it will not set the volume dirty. Then if you alse revert my changes
to ntfsresize you have your old broken ntfsresize back. Now lets see you
fix it if you know so much better, o wise one!
Best regards,
Anton
--
Anton Altaparmakov <aia21 at cam.ac.uk> (replace at with @)
Unix Support, Computing Service, University of Cambridge, CB2 3QH, UK
Linux NTFS maintainer, http://www.linux-ntfs.org/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
