Re: Linux for Network Attached Storage?

From: Randy McLaughlin (randy_at_nospam.com)
Date: 06/16/05 

Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2005 18:46:25 -0500

"Andy Turner" <andyt@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:6ia1b1lpead0p66gq4a0qqdacsd0ar8j7f@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 12:56:29 -0500, "Randy McLaughlin"
> <randy@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>>"Andy Turner" <andyt@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>>news:fvk0b1lrgod6545ccuqtsh176ekp5sn4c8@4ax.com...
>>>
>>> I have an old PC. Rather underpowered to run Windows XP, but I figured
>>> it's more than powerful enough to run as a file server, if I could
>>> find a dedicated lightweight OS for it. Is there an install of Linux
>>> that would help me turn an old PC into a NAS box? The PC I'm currently
>>> thinking of is an old P200 with 64mb RAM, though it's more of a
>>> general question really - I might be able to throw more hardware at
>>> it.
>>>
>>> Of course, being a Windows person, I'd want the storage to NTFS, if
>>> that's possible.
>
>>
>>As a windoze person you miss many points:
>
> Hmm.. and by using names such as "windoze" and "Micro$loth" you lost
> rather a lot of credibility. Come on, this ain't kindergarten here,
> grow up a little.
>
>
>> The file system is separated from the network access, using NTFS
>> on a Linux system is a kludge at best.
>
> Of course it is, but I'd like to retain the ability to take the drives
> from the NAS machine and drop them into an XP machine and for them to
> be readable.
>
>
>> Micro$loth does not release the technical details of the NTFS.
>
> There are Win98 drivers available to support NTFS - written by third
> parties. You honestly saying that there's not Linux support for NTFS?
> Really?
>
>
>>A P200 with 64K is plenty especially if you don't use GUI.
>
> Exactly, hence my original question which in your hurry to have a pop
> at both me and Microsoft, you've actually failed to answer. Do Linux
> people have to be so stereotypically angry?
>
>
>>Your biggest problem is it requires you to stop and learn what a computer
>>is.
>
> Oh come on, this is really rather sad. And as for the rest of your
> credibility - sorry fella, you just blew it.
>
>
>
> andyt

Your post reminds me of the joke about someone that is lost and didn't like
the directions he was given. He then goes off on the person helping him, in
response the person helping him pointed out who is the one lost.

Micro$loth has been at war with Linux and the entire open source community.
This war makes it difficult to support NTFS, it is not the Linux communities
fault.

A little googling will find that a great deal of effort has been put into
reverse engineering NTFS with limited results. NTFS is more of a database
than a file system with a great deal of cross linking. When a link gets
broken rather than have an automatic repair mechanism it can corrupt the
entire disk.

If your requirement is a file server that sits on an NTFS disk your best
choice is to buy a new P4 server and load a Micro$loth OS, preferably
Windows 2003 server.

Please remember I am not the one that's lost, if you want help and good
advise we are happy to help. It requires that you stop and learn what a
computer is. It may sound like you are being talked down to, in truth it
is. You have pre-conceived beliefs that are incorrect, to get over your
preconceptions you must stop and realize that.

As I said a P200 with 64K of RAM has plenty of horsepower to provide a
decent server, it can do a lot more than just be a file server. It can not
be a decent fileserver with NTFS disks.

Randy

Relevant Pages