Re: [PLUG] Windows driver for ext2/ext3

[brent timothy saner via plug <plug@lists.phillylinux.org>]

On 3/21/21 12:49, Walt Mankowski via plug wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 20, 2021 at 09:32:56PM -0400, brent saner via plug wrote:
>> Oh, you don't like Powershell commands? They're just copypasta, but fair
>> enough.
>>
>> https://www.windowscentral.com/install-windows-subsystem-linux-windows-10
>>
>> No typing required. This method *does* require modifying the Settings, but
>> there's screenshots,
> 
> I confess I've lost track of your arguments. Are you still maintaining
> that this is the simple way to do things? :)

My original assertion, which you took issue with, was - and I quote -

"It's still hacky, but it's less hacky than a lot of other options."

At no point did I maintain it's the *most simple* way to accomplish this
of all options.

> 
> I think it's reasonable that there are a range of solutions to Eric's
> problem, and which one is best depends on how often he's going to need
> to exchange files with his wife's laptop. Using WSL seems like
> overkill if he's only going to do this every couple of months. And if
> he's going to do it a lot, probably a NAS or Samba shares, or even a
> shared dropbox folder, would be a better solution. I'm honestly not
> sure that WSL would ever be the best solution here.

That's fine, I don't need to convince you. Being someone who has done a
lot of cross-platform integration, I know firsthand which I'd prefer
given the option - and setting up Samba ain't it. Because in order to
get things working nicely with Samba, you don't just "set up a share".
You configure an entire service[0]. And *then* you get to configure a
share. And don't forget that you should map a share on the client. And
don't forget to add *multiple* shares because you can't use arbitrary
locations with Samba. And make sure the media is hooked up to the right box.

> 
>> This is... not true, on the Samba point. Not everyone is using some Ubuntu
>> derivative where shares and hooks in the file explorer shortcuts pre-exist
>> at installtime of the OS.
> 
> I was thinking he'd just create a share on his Linux box and map it
> as a shared drive on the laptop. That seems pretty simple.

See above and [0]. The setup involved for Samba is more complex than WSL
installation, which is literally a copypasta'd 1 or 6 lines (depending
on if you have beta enabled for Windows or not).

>> As for exFAT, it suffers extreme performance degradation the more files are
>> on a filesystem, it doesn't support TRIM on nix-like last I checked, and
>> you *absolutely* want journaling on a removable disk, otherwise you're left
>> with artifact objects over time which you won't be able to fix without
>> reformatting the thing.
> 
> I'm certainly not going to argue that exFAT is the filesystem I'd pick
> for a production system. I'd only recommend it for things like flash
> drives because there's good support everywhere.

"It works great (until it doesn't)."

OP asked for, and I quote:

"Does anyone have experience with a *trustworthy*, *solid*, and *safe*
solution to get ext2/ext3 support in Windows?"
(emphasis added)

> 
> I don't know about you, but for me I have some flash drives that sit
> on my knapsack for months on end until the opportunity arises to use
> them. Performance is the way less important than convenience. I don't
> want to fiddle around with settings or network connections. I'd gladly
> trade a bit longer transfer times for having it just work when I plug
> it in. Also, I'm having a hard time imagining a situation where I'm
> using flash drives to snearkernet files that the filesystem
> performance would even be noticeable, let alone something that I'd
> want to optimize for.

See above. Performance is not the only concern when it comes to exFAT.
The reality is it's a redesign of a filesystem that is functionally dead
(with the exception of ESPs), and attempted to address limitations of
that. It was never designed to be a solid filesystem, it was designed
precisely so you could use files >4GB, and.... that's about it.

Samba, worth noting, requires far more "fiddling with settings [and]
network connections" than WSL would (which would not require it at all -
in fact, it wouldn't even require a network connection to be active on
the machine), yet it is something you directly suggested as acceptable.

> 
> All things being equal, I'd certainly prefer to have journaling on a
> removable disk. I've got an external drive hooked up to my Linux box
> now, and it's ext4. But for a flash drive I use mainly to transfer
> files between different machines running different operating systems,
> I'd rather have something that works everywhere with a minimum of
> fuss.

I'm fairly certain using a non-journaled filesystem is really not a good
idea for a medium that has the propensity to have its connection to the
hardware suddenly and forcibly removed.

> 
> Look, this isn't a production system. It will take a lot of cruft to
> fill up his 64 GB drive. What's the big deal if the worst case happens
> and you have to reformat it? It's all temporary files anyway. And
> it'll take way less time than installing WSL2. You don't need a pickup
> truck when a wheelbarrow will do.
> 

You are applying the concept of temporary files on the original request
without OP suggesting or implying as such, let alone stating it.

Again, the original request was:

"Does anyone have experience with a *trustworthy*, *solid*, and *safe*
solution to get ext2/ext3 support in Windows?"



[0] https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Samba#Usage
___________________________________________________________________________
Philadelphia Linux Users Group         --        http://www.phillylinux.org
Announcements - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce
General Discussion  --   http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug