What FC5 can learn from... Knoppix 4.0

[NBZ]

Hello all

I hav been following rawhide recently, and like Fedora (Its the only Linux I have used extensively. I used FC1 briefly, then FC2 a bit more. I used FC3 extensively... and thought FC4 should be perfect upon release. I was slightly disapointed. It was very good, but had a few drawbacks. Now we are within a few months of FC5.)

I booted Knoppix a couple of days ago (to fix a friends PC which would not boot...), and it automatically loaded the NTFS partitions as read/write. Cool. And will never happen out of the box in Fedora. Understandably. (write is not even stable yet! so to say the least, I did not have the courage to test it.)

However when I unmounted the partitions, they were still visible as (unmounted) drives in nautilus!

I have tried to do this with Fedora (Core 4 and rawhide), without success. When I looked into this, there was a bug with I think hal due to which this was disabled. the mounting of everything as read/write caused problems, so the whole module was disabled instead of allowing just read, or showing unmounted partitions.

Not sure if this should go into fedora focus, or dev section. but since this is something that can be fixed, I will put it in dev section.

[SlowJet]

I booted Knoppix a couple of days ago (to fix a friends PC which would not boot...), and it automatically loaded the NTFS partitions as read/write. Cool. And will never happen out of the box in Fedora. Understandably. (write is not even stable yet! so to say the least, I did not have the courage to test it.)

However when I unmounted the partitions, they were still visible as (unmounted) drives in nautilus!

I have tried to do this with Fedora (Core 4 and rawhide), without success. When I looked into this, there was a bug with I think hal due to which this was disabled. the mounting of everything as read/write caused problems, so the whole module was disabled instead of allowing just read, or showing unmounted partitions.

Not sure if this should go into fedora focus, or dev section. but since this is something that can be fixed, I will put it in dev section.

This NTFS mounting practice goes against every reasonable good computing practice and could result in lost Windows XP installations.

Ubuntu Dapper Drake 6.04 development is doing it also.
Every reboot I have to disable the NTFS partitions and then right clcik on the resido icons and unmount them (They are already unmounted but that removes them and I get an unmount error.

1. r or rw , on a XP NTFS with classical security they wouldn't be readable anyway.

2. Just because some one codes something dowsn't make it safe or usable in the real world.

3. Exposing another OS on the admin tools and the desktop is a really bad security broach.

I'm so pissed at these FC and Ubuntu guys I could spit nails.

4. edit - and the NTFS is mounted under media which totally rediculous.

SJ

[linmix]

In FC4, using gnome, I added a disk mounter applet to my bottom menu bar, All 'external' partitions (fat32) are shown whether mounted or unmounted.

[ilja]

You will never have support for NTFS out of the Box in Fedora because of legal (http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ForbiddenItems#head-e52c1870d4467fe40c9da546fe3328e4a2430834) reasons.

[NBZ]

I know Fedora will NEVER ship with NTFS out of the box. I understand and accept that.

I also know that automatically mounting an NTFS partition as read AND write is bad practice, and the writing is not yet finalised etc...

What I want is for Fedora to ACKNOWLEDGE the axistence ofthese partitions, and show it so in Nautilus.

Optionally it should also mount (as readonly for safety... or give a boot option so defaults can be changed by filesystem type later) all internal partitions which it recognises the file system of automagicaly during boot.

[NBZ]

In FC4, using gnome, I added a disk mounter applet to my bottom menu bar, All 'external' partitions (fat32) are shown whether mounted or unmounted.

what is the name of the software?

and does it show the unmounted partitions in nautilus (under computer...)

Thanks in advance

[Firewing1]

Hey,
I know the CD's can't include the software. But, for the sake of everyone, could we include an optional install of Livna repo, and then during firstboot install these rpms? (Java, ATi/Nvidia, NTFS, ndiswrapper, etc.
Firewing1

[SlowJet]

Firewing1,

One can install rpm's anythime they want.
But the distro should not autoinstall or mount another OS's file system.
In fact, live cd's should not even use a swap file unless it is told to do so at boot option time.

SJ

[Finalzone]

Hey,
I know the CD's can't include the software. But, for the sake of everyone, could we include an optional install of Livna repo, and then during firstboot install these rpms? (Java, ATi/Nvidia, NTFS, ndiswrapper, etc.
Firewing1

Fedora Project cannot directly link to third parties repo that contains proprietaries and patented softwares under Forbidden Items rules. In a future, users will be able to include their favorite third parties repo during installation.

[linmix]

what is the name of the software?

and does it show the unmounted partitions in nautilus (under computer...)

Thanks in advance

It's called just that 'disk mounter' It's agnome pannel applet and so only shows on the panel, not in the nautilus browser.

Now tat I come to think of it, nautilus used to show my fat partitions, but now only shows usb drives and cd/dvd when mounted. I wonder why that is.

[Firewing1]

Firewing1,
One can install rpm's anythime they want.
SJ
True, and I know for me it's easy. Takes 5 minutes. But remember the first time you used Linux? It seemed so big and complex. A newb will not think first thing of installing Livna, and then the kernel module, or even knowing what both are. They see "my driver's dont work." They're used to XP were accelerated drives come packed.

But the distro should not autoinstall or mount another OS's file system.
In fact, live cd's should not even use a swap file unless it is told to do so at boot option time.
SJ
Sorry, not following you there.... (I know what your saying but i don't see the relevance...)

[NBZ]

I think he means a live CD should not 'touch' the system.

Using a swap partition means it has used the hdd, which could be catastrophic?

Does knoppix not use a virtual swap that is in memmory only?

even if it does not mount another OS's partitions, it should atleast detect their presence, and show it as thus.

[RedFedora]

Knoppix does use virtual swap in memory, unless the RAM is really
small, in which case it makes a swap file on the hard drive.
It asks first.

[c0uchm0nster]

If I'm not mistaken (which I very well could be) to recognize that the partition is in fact NTFS the system needs ntfs support. So, since FC can't (and shouldn't) include this, the partitions would just show as unrecognized anyways.

I suppose it could guess by the partition's type id but this isn't 100% accurate... and besides, if the ability to read/write the drive isn't included it would only confuse people to see a hd but not be able to do anything with it. Those who knew what the problem was could see all available partitions by just ls'ing /dev/hd* or /dev/sd* and those who don't know probably shouldn't be trying to use linux to recover a Windows box in the first place.

[RedFedora]

I don't see why Fedora "shouldn't" include NTFS support. At least read support.
Lots of boxes have a NTFS partition on them and it would be a great tool
for newbies who are duel booting.

[jim]

as this has been discussed many times before

The Fedora project ( namely Redhat) doesn't want to get into legal battles with patent infrigment. So there for they do not ship the product that could potentually cause suit(s) againts them

[RedFedora]

I didn't ask why they don't, I asked why they shouldn't. The poster before
me said Fedora can't and "shouldn't" add NTFS support. Sure, maybe they
can't do it for legal reasons, but I think it would be a nice feature
as an add-on.

[jim]

As i said that is WHY they shouldn't

[c0uchm0nster]

Last time I checked NTFS support (~9 months ago I think) the read was just as experimental as the write - granted there were lots more risks with the write feature...

But again I'd like to point out the false appearance problem. Just like if they show the partitions but don't have the driver for you to access them, if they only have a driver to read from them it could be equally confusing to those not in the know. And besides, unless you want to create a new driver that is read-only support, I doubt someone is going to make a branch of current NTFS drivers with LESS features than the main branch.

And one more supporting point for "shouldn't" (fedorajim touched on this but I typed this before seeing his posts): while certain amounts of reverse engineering are legally allowed for reasons of compatibility Fedora specifically steers clear of anything even slightly controversial, so if they're ever going to break this rule (which they aren't going to) I doubt they'd want to make the first exception something that could piss off Microsoft =P

So: If you want ntfs support for your box it's not all that hard to install it once. And if you want it for a livecd recovery - well, Knoppix already has it, plus theres about 20000 how-to's on creating your own livecd distribution. Yes, there would be appeal in having native NTFS support, if it actually worked (which it doesn't), if it wasn't a grey area of legality (which it is), and if it wouldn't confuse the hell out of people who don't know it's quirks and limitations (which it does/would).

Oh, and by the way, in 1-1.5 yrs NTFS will be MS's equivalent of deprecated, as the winfs file system will most likely have been released. If you're just looking for something for your dual boot machine, when I had windows dual-booting I used to use some windows explorer extensions for ext2 support. This way I could still share files between the os' just fine and not have to worry about lax permissions on an extra fat32 partition.

[RedFedora]

It is times liek this that make me wonder why America has such
tight legal laws binding its software. North of the border, in Canada,
we can release software with mp3 support, ntfs support, video
codecs, etc. Heck, we can even write encrytion/decryption code
without fear of law enforcement arresting us.
It makes me think that RedHat/Fedora is going to have an increasing
up hill battle against software organisations who aren't
restricted as much by patents/copyright.

[Finalzone]

Why wasting time debating about Red Hat/Fedora philosophies when third parties repositories already fill the gap?
Fedora Project already linked to fedorafaq.org so users can see how to include closed sources applications.
The problem is patents softwares owners unwilling to grant unrestricted access of the source codes. By then, you will have to ask US patent lawyers about these issues. You should contact Electronic Frontiers Fondation (http://www.eff.org) for further details.

[RedFedora]

Because just look at the process here:
1. Install Fedora
2. Find something missing.
3. Read the forum.
4. Read the FAQs
5. Setup third party repos
6. Install missing compoents.

Mean while other distros (those not from the US of A and those
not obsessed with the everything must be completely open ideal)
Just Work. Sure, third party repos fill the gap, but for someone new to
Linux, or even some of us who'd just like a working system out
of the box, this is a long way around.

[w5set]

*************************************
Mean while other distros (those not from the US of A and those
not obsessed with the everything must be completely open ideal)
************************************
Major point is...It is USA based--more or less..
It does have to stick to the local rules/laws.
If you stick your head up and get into the "Legal Spotlight"--you sure as $#$$
will have a lawyer taking a pot shot right at you.
If you stand on the "moral high ground"--it certainly is frowned on when you include, restricted in some way, "other" legally encumbered programs.
If you wish to install the "other" apps/programs--please do so, many will help out if you have problems.
But on the other hand, please don't insist the distro (FC) take the sure quick road into a court in any one of a dozen countries it could be sued in, by including a few of your favorite "things" in the default install.
Many people believe in Open Source, and furthering the open source cause. If you really believe some of the, more or less, "restricted in use" apps should be included--please bug the owners of the source codes involved for release..It would certainly be more constructive there then posting a want here.
Bug the video card vendors, the sound card vendors, the Raid card vendors for Linux drivers or release of Linux support..
End Users have power-----exercise it!!
But the Developers of Software/Equipment/Cards usually have more then just a few dollars put into the program too, please let them at least get their investment back out too---Open Source does not necessarily mean FREE. Most of them like to eat fairly often just as you and I do.

[c0uchm0nster]

Because just look at the process here:
1. Install Fedora
2. Find something missing.
3. Read the forum.
4. Read the FAQs
5. Setup third party repos
6. Install missing compoents.


A more realistic process:
1. Install Fedora
2. Find something missing.
3. Either a message tells you why it's missing and you go to the FAQ, or you just go to the FAQ.
4. Download an rpm to add support, or else add support for third-party repos (although this doesn't really count because you're going to do this anyways)
5. Double click on rpm or type yum install blah
6. Next time you install a Fedora distro you have 1 step: download & install rpm, or burn a cd with said rpm on it for inclusion during the install process (you know, that part where it says insert any discs to install third party applications...)

The process if NTFS was included automatically:
1. Select NTFS during install
2. Try to write to your NTFS drive (because you haven't read the documentation right? I mean you don't read the ext2, ext3, or lvm documentations the first time you install FC).
3. Lose gigabytes of irreplacible data.
4. Never use linux again.

Process if only read-only support was included:
1. Select NTFS during install
2. Try to write to your NTFS drive
3. Go to forums
4. Go to FAQ
5. Go back to forums and complain about no write support.
6. You're told you can install ntfs driver with experimental write support.
7. Setup your repos
8. Uninstall read-only NTFS driver
9. Download & install new NTFS driver

Windows equivalent comparison:
1. Spend 2 weeks job-hunting
2. Work two 40hr weeks until your first pay check.
3. Buy Windows
4. Buy Antivirus
5. Re-install grub for dual-boot since windows overwrote it.
6. Buy ext2 support for windows.
7. Buy ext3 support for windows.
8. Buy lvm support for windows (does it exist?)
9. Wait a few days for them to arrive in the mail.
10. Install them and find out you need to open an extra program to be able to mount/browse these drives.

I don't know about you, but I'd take the 5-step no built-in support version over the rest any day.

[NBZ]

The write in the kernel is no longer *experimantal* its just experimantal now ;)

The read works fine, and has done so fora long time. It was 2.4.x where it could damage things, but for 2.6.x, the ntfs code was thrown away, and completely rewriten. Now in kernel 2.6.15, everything is supported apart from creating new files.

It should not be oficially included if it any way compromises RedHat/Fedora now, or even possiibly in the future. Too much of a risk.

Back to my question, I am not saying that the system detects it as an NTFS partition... just that it detects *a* partition, and shows it has detected it in nautilus.

Now, if the driver is present, it should be able to find out what type it is, and present a mount option... or if the driver is not present, just give a general error. 'Partition type not recognised' or something equally dumb.

[linmix]

my experience:
install FC4
find something missing
find FedoraFaq: problems solved.

[neighborlee]

my experience:
install FC4
find something missing
find FedoraFaq: problems solved.

thats your reality not average end-user-who-isn't-geek reality...if this is the accepted end-user experience then fedora will die except to those geeks that like to flirt with bleeding edge components. Judging by the difficulty in setting up some desktop componentes, Id say FC/rh has no desire 'atm', to address end-user segment of society. ( look what a mess it is to get java going and that a command line is needed to install nvidia )

see mepis nudging closer to fedora and you'll get the point quickly.., its clear the 'work out of box' idea is enticing to many ( altough I can't verify the legality of its use in that distro atm).

There are other issues I see facing fedora and IMO they are ( only asking out of desire to see fedora improve for end-users ):

choose reiserfs during install ( users aren't dumb if presented with facts, something gnome needs to learn as well,read linus thread if you dont know )

decide to use certain plugins with a 'sign here' option.

working menu edit out of box ( kde has it why is gnome so stubborn )

'un'official faq says fedora is NOT unstable..if it is not and to the contrary some here say is can't be expected to be stable due to bleeding edge software in use for RHEE inclusion at some point, then on what level should someone expect that the level of risk is acceptable to use fedora ?

java needs to be easier to install. ( current method is ridiculous and not what an end-user will tolerate ).

I love the anaconda installer , bootsplash and overall polish .
( trying to avoid flames and I really do feel this way ).


cheers
nl

[hiberphoptik]

6. Buy ext2 support for windows.
7. Buy ext3 support for windows.


just an FYI.. you can get free apps to read/write to your ext2/ext3 partitions from windows

while handy i dont like it because it makes things less secure, whats the point in requiring a local login to my linux box if somone can go into windows and run ex2fs and hit my linux files with no security

but.. back to the topic... i think we should not look at it like "what can FC5 learn from FC4" i think we should look at it like "what can FC5 learn from other distros being used right now"

i love Fedora, and my system is so tight it makes everyone envious.... however when i try live cds of other distros i am blown away at the subtle little things that should be included with a modern Fedora install

[linmix]

thats your reality not average end-user-who-isn't-geek reality...if this is the accepted end-user experience then fedora will die except to those geeks that like to flirt with bleeding edge components. Juding by the difficulty in setting up some desktop componentes, Id say FC/rh has no desire 'atm', to address end-user segment of society. ( look what a mess it is to get java going and that a command line is needed to install nvidia )

Wow, that's the first time I classify as a geek :p

nvidia? a quick copy and paste from the FedoraFaq got it up and running in no time:
yum install nvidia-glx kernel-module-nvidia-$(uname -r)

Java is slightly more complicated and I don't like the FedoraFaq way, but Stanton-Finley (http://stanton-finley.net/fedora_core_4_installation_notes.html#Java) provides a simple and working alternative.

I don't really iunderstand why nvidia drivers can't be part of the extras (don't remember having to okey any licence for the driver download at the nvidia site), but in the case of Java it's pretty obvious. And since it is SUN who provides the packages the fact that installation is 'difficult' can hardly be blamed on any distro.

[Finalzone]

I don't really iunderstand why nvidia drivers can't be part of the extras (don't remember having to okey any licence for the driver download at the nvidia site),
Nvidia is closed source thus cannot be included in Fedora.

[linmix]

I see, but I don't understand.
I think it's great to strive to have a completely open-source distro and the perfect scenario would be for nVidia to release the source-code of their drivers, but ... the drivers are provided free of charge and without restrictions.

Just give me a couple of minutes to get it all straight again. I simply find it very hard to draw the line between free and FREE, especially if that line makes using their PCs quite a bit more complicated for a large number of users (thank <you fill it in> for livna). It feels like an unneceesary hurdle, that's all

[neighborlee]

I see, but I don't understand.
I think it's great to strive to have a completely open-source distro and the perfect scenario would be for nVidia to release the source-code of their drivers, but ... the drivers are provided free of charge and without restrictions.

Just give me a couple of minutes to get it all straight again. I simply find it very hard to draw the line between free and FREE, especially if that line makes using their PCs quite a bit more complicated for a large number of users (thank <you fill it in> for livna). It feels like an unneceesary hurdle, that's all

agreed 100% with everything you said, and i would like to urge fedora to reconsider this IMHO restrictive policy for the benefit of OSS users worldwide.

cheers
nl

[Finalzone]

I see, but I don't understand.
I think it's great to strive to have a completely open-source distro and the perfect scenario would be for nVidia to release the source-code of their drivers, but ... the drivers are provided free of charge and without restrictions.

Free of charge is not equal to Free and Open Source .
Read Forbidden Items (http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ForbiddenItems) and this quote

The NVIDIA graphics drivers are proprietary and many kernel developers consider this driver to violate the GPL license of the kernel.

[Malkosha]

Well, I can understand FC’s reluctance to deal with 3rd party apps whether they are free or not. It seems to be a policy that takes a very broad approach which makes things easy for FC but not for the user.

One distro that doesn’t do this is Mepis. You get drivers for Nvidia and ATI as well as java, mp3 support, Kaffine with WMV support, flash, etc all installed when you boot up. A user doesn’t have to do anything … its just there.

Now, IMO, what this does is divide distro’s into their proper places. That’s is, distro’s like Mepis are really great for first time users and people who aren’t technically minded. It’s even great for those that install at lot and don’t feel like going through the routine of setting up all the minor things … well minor to them anyway. If you want to introduce a user to Linux Mepis is a great choice.

Distro’s like FC are more for the power user for likes to tweak and play and has no problems installing stuff. Its also great for the first time user who wants to learn Linux instead of just using it. If you want to play you load FC and run with it.

If FC wants to move into the “first time and no techie” arena it will have to include all of this stuff on install. Until then, FC is what it is. A distro for the power user or first time techie.

Nothing wrong with that.

[linmix]

I like that defenition a lot better: 'first time techie' sounds just about right :D