Comments for Captive
sandbox??
Hi Jan!
Thank you very much for this release. I decided to get rid of MSWin, and this was a very useful tool to rearrange NTFS partitions.
There was numerous isuues, though. Namely, I was able to remove things, I even haven't seen them listed, BUT THEN THEY APPEARED AGAIN )))
Finally, I was invoking sync - umount - mount after almost any operation on the disks. Does it have to do something with sandbox? Is it ok?
Re: Very well put together
> I do notice the
> initial mounting process does take
> slightly longer than the Linux-NTFS
> project. But, once I'm past that, it's
> quite transparent.
It takes some time to internally boot the Microsoft Windows subsystem. :-)
> One question I have for you, how would I
> allow normal users to access those
> drives?
Version 1.1 needs "mount -o fmask=666,dmask=777". Default of v1.1 is 600/700, Next v1.1.1 will default to the common 644/755 (root/owner r/w, users r/o).
Very well put together
I commend you for this project. I am currently using this on my XP NTFS partitions and I am impressed that I can actually move, edit, and remove files and directories with no apparent ill effects. This is very nice indeed.
I initially was skeptical because it uses wine and parts of ReactOS (I have messed with this OS a few times), but you have proved me wrong. I have noticed no lag on my system. I do notice the initial mounting process does take slightly longer than the Linux-NTFS project. But, once I'm past that, it's quite transparent.
One question I have for you, how would I allow normal users to access those drives? It would seem that user=<uid> is of no effect. I may be doing something wrong, but captive-cmdline does report user=<uid>.
Re: sandbox??
> Namely, I was able to remove things, I
> even haven't seen them listed, BUT THEN
> THEY APPEARED AGAIN )))
> Finally, I was invoking sync - umount -
> mount after almost any operation on the
> disks. Does it have to do something with
> sandbox? Is it ok?
* Always umount the drive before shutting down GNU/Linux (probably not your problem).
* Check your system logs for any Captive messages. Captive will rather give up (=>files reappear) the modifications if there is a risk of corrupting the drive.
* "Sandbox" is required to be turned on for any safe operations of Captive. Running without "sandbox" is only for debugging purposes as it may corrupt your drive.
* Always use the captive-cmdline(1) client only as the Linux kernel interface (for mount(8)) always sucked either as LUFS or as FUSE just because Linux kernel sucks.