Best file format to use

[blazerazor]

What is the best file format to use if I want a drive to be viewable by both windows and Linux. I want to have all my music on a external drive, that is able to read/write to by both linux and windows.

 

[Kaervak]

Since it's going to be in an enclosure, FAT32 is probably your best bet. Linux can sorta write to NTFS, but since you're using the drive for audio the 4GB single file size limit of FAT32 is a non issue IMO.

 

[engineereeyore]

Originally posted by: Kaervak
Since it's going to be in an enclosure, FAT32 is probably your best bet. Linux can sorta write to NTFS, but since you're using the drive for audio the 4GB single file size limit of FAT32 is a non issue IMO.

:thumbsup: Sounds right to me.

 

[Nothinman]

Supposedly NTFS-3g works pretty well these days, I know of at least one person using it and I don't think he's had any major problems. There's also the ext2 IFS driver for Windows, but I'd probably trust that about as much as NTFS-3g.

Frankly the best option is to share the drive via the network so you can use a good, native filesystem for whichever box it's plugged into.

 

[themisfit610]

NTFS-3G is slow as hell last time I checked. It definitely is running under Mac OS X as a matter of fact.

~MiSfit

 

[TheVrolok]

Originally posted by: Nothinman
Supposedly NTFS-3g works pretty well these days, I know of at least one person using it and I don't think he's had any major problems. There's also the ext2 IFS driver for Windows, but I'd probably trust that about as much as NTFS-3g.

Frankly the best option is to share the drive via the network so you can use a good, native filesystem for whichever box it's plugged into.

I've been using NTFS-3g for a few weeks now and haven't noticed any problems. But for the OPs purpose, I see no reason why he shouldn't just use FAT32.

 

[Nothinman]

NTFS-3G is slow as hell last time I checked. It definitely is running under Mac OS X as a matter of fact.

Linux and OS X aren't the same so OS X's performance would have no bearing on Linux at all.

But for the OPs purpose, I see no reason why he shouldn't just use FAT32.

Because FAT is a terrible filesystem and should only be used on things where it doesn't really matter like small flash drives and such.

 

[TheVrolok]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

But for the OPs purpose, I see no reason why he shouldn't just use FAT32.

Because FAT is a terrible filesystem and should only be used on things where it doesn't really matter like small flash drives and such.

Well that's a given, but for the OPs use, what option does he have? I guess if he does have an external he could mount it as a network drive and use a native FS, but then that's a bit much. Copy across the network, then copy across USB/firewire? Eh.

 

[Nothinman]

Well that's a given, but for the OPs use, what option does he have? I guess if he does have an external he could mount it as a network drive and use a native FS, but then that's a bit much. Copy across the network, then copy across USB/firewire? Eh.

Yes, as I said in a previous post "Frankly the best option is to share the drive via the network so you can use a good, native filesystem for whichever box it's plugged into.". You can share USB/Firewire drives directly so it doesn't add any extra copies or anything.

 

[TheVrolok]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

Well that's a given, but for the OPs use, what option does he have? I guess if he does have an external he could mount it as a network drive and use a native FS, but then that's a bit much. Copy across the network, then copy across USB/firewire? Eh.

Yes, as I said in a previous post "Frankly the best option is to share the drive via the network so you can use a good, native filesystem for whichever box it's plugged into.". You can share USB/Firewire drives directly so it doesn't add any extra copies or anything.

Would copying over the network, and then over USB(assuming 2.0)/Firewire slow things down enough to warrant using a native FS? If he's using it just for music I guess it really doesn't matter what FS he ends up with. Although, I guess file copying time (past the initial copying of his current library) is damn near irrelevant when it comes to adding a few songs here and there. An interesting topic tho, don't know if I would have really thought to copy across the network/usb to an external just to use a decent native FS (NTFS I suppose in this case). Would you recommend he just read over the network as well (stream the music from across the network) or just move the drive back and forth for reading (which linux can do of NTFS without a problem) and writing (which the networked computer will do natively)?

 

[Nothinman]

Would copying over the network, and then over USB(assuming 2.0)/Firewire slow things down enough to warrant using a native FS?

Depends on how often you transfer large amounts of data I guess. He's talking about music which, assuming MP3s, is extremely small so even a difference of say 100% (~20s vs ~10s to copy a whole album) isn't going to be a big deal and play back will be just fine on even USB 1.1.

Would you recommend he just read over the network as well (stream the music from across the network) or just move the drive back and forth for reading (which linux can do of NTFS without a problem) and writing (which the networked computer will do natively)?

Why waste time moving the drive when it'll stream over the network just fine?

 

[TheVrolok]

Originally posted by: Nothinman
Why waste time moving the drive when it'll stream over the network just fine?

Just sorta seemed like the OP wanted to be able to plug his external in and have music ready to go.. now there's a bit of networking going on. Personally, I've got a network at my house with 7 computers on it using XP and a few varieties of Linux. For the reasons you've mentioned I just have all the music hosted on one of the Linux boxes and stream it over the network. Just wasn't sure how many people stream their music across a network.

 

[mundhra]

kinda late i guess, but i figured i'd chip in.

i've been very happy with using ext3 on a drive and mounting in windows using the Ext2 IFS. i had so much data that fat32 was just way too slow.

 

[anarchyreigns]

I have no problem reading and writing to my NTFS formatted Seagate FreeAgent external drive on Ubuntu with NTFS read/write support enabled. It works just as fast as when it's connected to a Windows machine.

 

[Markbnj]

I set up Samba today on a new Ubuntu box, shared out a big chunk of the drive, and then backed up a bunch of stuff from Windows. Works great, easy to set up, and very fast.

 

[child of wonder]

Originally posted by: Markbnj
I set up Samba today on a new Ubuntu box, shared out a big chunk of the drive, and then backed up a bunch of stuff from Windows. Works great, easy to set up, and very fast.

I second that.

I have a Linux server running 24/7 running Samba, email, http, DNS, etc.

Then I just map the share on my Windows PCs and automount it on my Linux boxes. All my music, movies, etc. are centrally stored on the server.