Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: linux-ntfs vs ntfs-3g

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Pune, India
    Ubuntu 10.10 Maverick Meerkat

    linux-ntfs vs ntfs-3g

    Hi all,
    I would like to know people's viewpoints (specifically filesystem folks) about the performance and reliability of linux-ntfs vs ntfs-3g.

    I read an interesting thread (a mini flame-war) about the two of them at linux-ntfs forum

    From the thread the following differences I could make out

    a. Linux-ntfs (some part of it) has been integrated in the kernel.
    b. NTFS-3g started life as a fork of linux-ntfs
    c. NTFS-3g has been more widely known (I know about this) and perhaps tested as well (Dunno really)

    So my questions are :-

    a. Does it make sense to install both ntfsprogs as well as ntfs-3g or just use one or the other?

    b. Which of the two is more reliable, better maintained and has more features ?

    c. Which of the two projects people perceive as making grounds in the near and medium future?
    Registered Linux user #468829

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Kubuntu 8.04 Hardy Heron

    Re: linux-ntfs vs ntfs-3g

    ntfs-3g has generally been more feature-packed than linux-ntfs AFAIK, ntfs-3g offered full write support long before linux-ntfs for example, I'd say it's more widely tested and used because of the amount of people who switched to it early on because of this

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Ubuntu 9.04 Jaunty Jackalope

    Re: linux-ntfs vs ntfs-3g

    AFAIK ntfs-3g is more widely used.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Cupertino, CA
    Ubuntu 10.04 Lucid Lynx

    Re: linux-ntfs vs ntfs-3g

    ntfs-3g is the preferred driver -- it's derived off the linux-ntfs codebase and has a larger userbase. It's also the only driver that supports write access to NTFS safely -- linux-ntfs has much more restrictions on how files may be written to.

    However, you still need ntfsprogs even if you use ntfs-3g, as the filesystem information query tools, resize, creation, etc tools are a part of ntfsprogs, not ntfs-3g. Also, linux-ntfs natively mounts via the kernel while ntfs-3g requires FUSE. This also MIGHT mean linux-ntfs for reading NTFS has faster performance.
    Quote Originally Posted by tuxradar
    Linux's audio architecture is more like the layers of the Earth's crust than the network model, with lower levels occasionally erupting on to the surface, causing confusion and distress, and upper layers moving to displace the underlying technology that was originally hidden

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2006

    Re: linux-ntfs vs ntfs-3g

    I have trouble with large files writing to NTFS. It is very slow.

Tags for this Thread


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts