>From "Samuel MartÃn Moro" <faus...@gmail.com>: > the problem is not which version of mkfs (ext2fs) you use. > the problem is that BSD only handle ext2fs partitions with 128b inodes, while > default value is 256. > when running mkfs/newfs, be sure to specify -I 128
> also, I won't recommand ntfs. > but, ntfs "works" correctly under BSD and Linux. > so, if you just want the partition to be read/writeable on both BSD and > Linux, and don't wan't to use 128b inodes, nor ext2, you may wanna consider > using fat (except the file size limit thing, it works great), or ntfs (quite > ugly, but still working) This (mkfs/newfs for ext2fs) might be worth trying, at least on a partition where Linux is not installed. I could also try ntfs on an experimental basis. Between Linux, NetBSD and FreeBSD, I wouldn't have to worry about being compatible with Microsoft's latest version of ntfs. >From "Polytropon" <free...@edvax.de>: > There is a way around this: Put the files to be transferred into > a tar archive. In this way, only the archives name will have to > obey 8.3, and its content will keep intact (case sensitive long > file names); the only downside is that extraction in DOS will > result in 8.3 filenames again (there's TAR.EXE for DOS). > Know that tar is the "most universal file system". :-) I did use > this approach in the past when having to fransfer files between > non-networked UNIX and Linux systems via floppy disk: Simply used > tar directly on the device (which's device name was of course > different on all the systems). Sort of a nuisance having to archive and extract every time, I could even use gzip or bzip2 to create a .tgz or .tbz But FreeDOS, using the file software imported from Unix (ls and other) will show long file names on FAT32 or even a CD. > I've also seen enclosures for hard disks including a CIFS share > management system via their network connection. A built-in browser- > accessible configuration tool can be used for customization. As > there is no separate software on the hard disk itself, the disk > can be replaced easily (if full or defective). This would be an > acceptable add-on for the PC in a one-PC-setting. I'm not familiar with this, don't know how I'd set it up. > An option would be to avoid the file system level at all. Maybe that's > not a solution to your requirements, but let me mention this: In a > interoperability environment, I did use a disk enclosure with built-in > FTP server. In this way, all OSes can r/w access its content via FTP. > There are no limits regarding 8.3 filenames. Even MacOS X runs well > in such a setting. The downside, of course, is that you have to run > a FTP session for every transfer (instead of just mounting a disk's > partition), but it's basically no problem to use a kind of "FTP-backed > file system", I think I have seen this in some KDE or Gnome... I'm not familiar with this and wouldn't know how to set this up. Check disk enclosures on http://www.compusa.com/ ? >From "Christer Solstrand Johannessen" <chris...@csj.no>: > I've successfully used CIFS/Samba and NFS between Linux, OpenBSD, > FreeBSD, Solaris and Windows for years. Easy to set up and works well. > If there are no Windows clients involved, I'd use NFS or AFS; with > Windows in the mix, CIFS/Samba may be a better choice as Windows NFS > clients are dodgy at best. Can this be done all within one computer, or do I need a second computer? >From "Andy Ruhl" <acr...@gmail.com>: > I thought UDF was supposed to be the solution to all of this. A friend > of mine had a USB external hard disk formatted with UDF and it worked > fine with both Linux and Windows. I think it's not as common for > formatting magnetic disk based filesystems as it probably should be > though. It's mostly used for DVDs. I've heard of UDF, recognized it as a file system for DVDs, can't find it specifically on my system but find two DVD-related packages. /var/log/packages/dvd+rw-tools-7.1-i486-1 /var/log/packages/libdvdread-4.1.3-i486-1 >From "Bruce Cran" <br...@cran.org.uk>: > I've not tried it recently, but I think UFS (both UFS1 and UFS2 seem to > be supported) should work well; since 2.6.29 Linux has supported > writing to UFS too; you may need to recompile the kernel to add support > for writing depending on how old the kernel is, but > http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=blob;f=Documentation/filesystems/ufs.txt;h=7a602adeca2b7399f04b50232c838a9aec305712;hb=HEAD > says simply that ufs2 has read-write support. I see, I could use ufstype=44bsd. I've read a NetBSD partition that way from Linux but wasnn't sufficiently daring to attempt to write to it. I could try it on an experimental basis, on a partition where NetBSD or FreeBSD is not installed. Do something like newfs /dev/ad0s8? Thanks to all for the helpful suggestions! Tom _______________________________________________ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
