Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #286414 > unrolled thread
| Started by | owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-03-27 22:46 +0000 |
| Last post | 2015-03-29 12:57 +0000 |
| Articles | 14 on this page of 54 — 7 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy
NTFS is case-sensitive owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-27 22:46 +0000
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-03-27 19:29 -0400
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2015-03-28 08:45 -0700
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-03-28 16:00 +0000
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-28 16:26 +0000
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-03-28 12:56 -0400
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-28 17:06 +0000
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2015-03-28 10:32 -0700
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-28 13:08 -0700
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-03-28 22:22 -0400
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-28 21:40 -0700
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-03-28 22:23 -0700
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-03-29 11:06 -0400
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-29 15:12 +0000
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-03-29 21:22 -0400
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-29 23:08 -0700
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-29 09:18 -0700
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-03-29 21:22 -0400
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-29 18:27 -0700
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-30 02:16 +0000
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-03-30 09:49 -0400
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-30 08:24 -0700
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-30 17:06 +0000
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-30 12:19 -0700
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-30 23:54 +0000
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-31 00:06 +0000
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-03-30 17:12 -0700
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-30 17:41 -0700
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-30 17:15 -0700
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-31 01:07 +0000
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-30 18:21 -0700
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-30 12:24 -0700
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-03-30 20:46 -0400
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-31 01:52 +0000
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-30 19:10 -0700
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-03-30 11:35 -0700
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-03-30 23:09 -0400
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-03-30 22:01 -0700
NTFS is not the best filesystem taka0038@gmail.com - 2015-03-31 18:52 -0700
Re: NTFS is not the best filesystem Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-03-31 22:51 -0400
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-03-30 09:48 -0400
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-30 08:44 -0700
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-03-30 09:37 -0700
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-03-30 20:50 -0400
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-30 19:14 -0700
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-03-28 17:09 -0700
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-29 00:24 +0000
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-03-28 22:26 -0400
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-28 16:09 +0000
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-03-28 13:06 -0400
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-28 17:15 +0000
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-28 17:28 +0000
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-28 18:35 +0000
Re: NTFS is case-sensitive owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-29 12:57 +0000
Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]
| From | DFS <nospam@dfs.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-30 09:48 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mfbk6m$4fp$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #286664 |
On 3/29/2015 9:27 PM, Snit wrote: > On 3/29/15, 6:22 PM, in article mfa8fq$7c6$3@dont-email.me, "DFS" > <nospam@dfs.com> wrote: > >> On 3/29/2015 12:18 PM, Snit wrote: >>> On 3/29/15, 8:06 AM, in article mf94c6$s6t$1@dont-email.me, "DFS" >>> <nospam@dfs.com> wrote: >>> >>>>>> pwnage earned by changing the case of one letter? Epic! >>>>>> >>>>>> owl is a tricky bastard and it's hard to get one by him. >>>>>> >>>>>> Congrats! >>>>> >>>>> Thanks. Wish I could say it was fully on purpose. :) >>>> >>>> >>>> The plot thickens... you spelled it Owl by accident? >>>> >>>> That would change it from Snit pwnage to owl self-nuke, and your trophy >>>> must be returned. >>> >>> Fair enough. I humbly return the trophy... and grant Owl the mushroom cloud >>> reward. :) >> >> It's good you came clean - 5 months later - but an 'honest and >> honorable' man would've never let my assumption stand in the first >> place. I always figured you intentionally wrote 'Owl' to try and trick >> him, since you were in the middle of a case-sensitivity debate. >> >> Instead of admitting it right then, you took credit for it several times >> when I brought it up as pwnage, and said "That was fun". >> >> Why did you finally admit it wasn't intentional? > > It was fun to see him self-nuke. Never implied it was intentional. What? Of course you did, when you let stand many times my assumption that you did it intentionally. It's just more of that 'honesty and honorableness' you're crammed full of.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-30 08:44 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D13EBD77.49467%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #286715 |
On 3/30/15, 6:48 AM, in article mfbk6m$4fp$2@dont-email.me, "DFS" <nospam@dfs.com> wrote: > On 3/29/2015 9:27 PM, Snit wrote: >> On 3/29/15, 6:22 PM, in article mfa8fq$7c6$3@dont-email.me, "DFS" >> <nospam@dfs.com> wrote: >> >>> On 3/29/2015 12:18 PM, Snit wrote: >>>> On 3/29/15, 8:06 AM, in article mf94c6$s6t$1@dont-email.me, "DFS" >>>> <nospam@dfs.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>>>> pwnage earned by changing the case of one letter? Epic! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> owl is a tricky bastard and it's hard to get one by him. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Congrats! >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks. Wish I could say it was fully on purpose. :) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> The plot thickens... you spelled it Owl by accident? >>>>> >>>>> That would change it from Snit pwnage to owl self-nuke, and your trophy >>>>> must be returned. >>>> >>>> Fair enough. I humbly return the trophy... and grant Owl the mushroom cloud >>>> reward. :) >>> >>> It's good you came clean - 5 months later - but an 'honest and >>> honorable' man would've never let my assumption stand in the first >>> place. I always figured you intentionally wrote 'Owl' to try and trick >>> him, since you were in the middle of a case-sensitivity debate. >>> >>> Instead of admitting it right then, you took credit for it several times >>> when I brought it up as pwnage, and said "That was fun". >>> >>> Why did you finally admit it wasn't intentional? >> >> It was fun to see him self-nuke. Never implied it was intentional. > > > What? Of course you did, when you let stand many times my assumption > that you did it intentionally. > > It's just more of that 'honesty and honorableness' you're crammed full of. > > > > > OK, your games get old but by all means please quote where I did as you say. You will fail. Then declare yourself the "winner". But go for it. -- * Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu: <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE> * Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs? <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA> * Mint KDE working with folders: <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0> * Mint KDE creating files: <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8> * Mint KDE help: <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8> * Mint KDE general navigation: <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI> * Mavericks / Pages 5.1: <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk> * OS / Word Processor Comparison: <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-30 09:37 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <4a5bf448-e83a-42d0-89db-58cde85ddc9a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #286735 |
On Monday, March 30, 2015 at 9:44:47 AM UTC-6, Snit wrote:
> On 3/30/15, 6:48 AM, in article mfbk6m$4fp$2@dont-email.me, "DFS"
> <nospam@dfs.com> wrote:
>
> > On 3/29/2015 9:27 PM, Snit wrote:
> >> On 3/29/15, 6:22 PM, in article mfa8fq$7c6$3@dont-email.me, "DFS"
> >> <nospam@dfs.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 3/29/2015 12:18 PM, Snit wrote:
> >>>> On 3/29/15, 8:06 AM, in article mf94c6$s6t$1@dont-email.me, "DFS"
> >>>> <nospam@dfs.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>>> pwnage earned by changing the case of one letter? Epic!
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> owl is a tricky bastard and it's hard to get one by him.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Congrats!
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Thanks. Wish I could say it was fully on purpose. :)
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The plot thickens... you spelled it Owl by accident?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> That would change it from Snit pwnage to owl self-nuke, and your trophy
> >>>>> must be returned.
> >>>>
> >>>> Fair enough. I humbly return the trophy... and grant Owl the mushroom cloud
> >>>> reward. :)
> >>>
> >>> It's good you came clean - 5 months later - but an 'honest and
> >>> honorable' man would've never let my assumption stand in the first
> >>> place. I always figured you intentionally wrote 'Owl' to try and trick
> >>> him, since you were in the middle of a case-sensitivity debate.
> >>>
> >>> Instead of admitting it right then, you took credit for it several times
> >>> when I brought it up as pwnage, and said "That was fun".
> >>>
> >>> Why did you finally admit it wasn't intentional?
> >>
> >> It was fun to see him self-nuke. Never implied it was intentional.
> >
> >
> > What? Of course you did, when you let stand many times my assumption
> > that you did it intentionally.
> >
> > It's just more of that 'honesty and honorableness' you're crammed full of.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> OK, your games get old
Right, this is *his* game, not yours... no one saw that coming! LOL!
> but by all means please quote where I did as you say.
It's implicit, you know, the other issue you have along with context (both of which have been pointed out many times).
> You will fail.
Not for people who can comprehend what they read.
> Then declare yourself the "winner". But go for it.
Whatever you say, "Chad Seymore"...
Snit:
"Gee, I point out your actions... am very specific and give a current
and relevant example... and you just whine and name call. Why not
"try to defend your actions, or, better yet, why don't you just stop
trolling and lying? Really - work on being honest like I am. It
would do you good."
ed:
"hey snit, since you seem to be giving much lip service to honesty and not
lying these days, would you like to go ahead and fess up to some of the lies
you've admitted to me in email, or perhaps you you won't mind me posting it
up? how about it? :D"
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/bVedYXzPXy0/ngYJdnrNde8J
What Ebot got from your site as posted in the same thread:
-------
http://myweb.cableone.net/snit/csma/honor/
Honer and Honesty Code
The following people agree to treat each other with honor and honesty.
This does not imply that they will always agree, but that in
disagreements they will treat each other in ways that adhere to the
mutually agreed upon code.
The code is:
1 Be specific. Use the specific example of what it is you that
is bothering you. Vague complaints are hard to agree on, especially in a
forum like this.
2 Don't generalize. Avoid words like "never" or "always." Such
generalizations are usually inaccurate and will heighten tensions.
3 Don't stockpile. Storing up lots of grievances over time is
counterproductive. It's almost impossible to deal with numerous old
problems for which interpretations may differ. Try to deal with problems
as they arise.
4 Agree to let the past go.
These people have agreed to this pact, and should be held accountable to
treating each other based on the code.
CSMA Name Date Link
Snit 15 May 2004 Author
ed 30 Nov 2004 Pending arrival on Google
-------
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topicsearchin/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/%22Honer$20and$20honesty%22/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/bVedYXzPXy0
"Honer"?
Hmm, missed that before now. Was it done purposefully, so you could skirt out on a technicality? That actually wouldn't surprise me at all and you clearly know how to spell it (as shown in the URL).
You need a new schtick, "Chad", h&h isn't working.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | DFS <nospam@dfs.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-30 20:50 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mfcr03$5iv$6@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #286735 |
On 3/30/2015 11:44 AM, Snit wrote: > On 3/30/15, 6:48 AM, in article mfbk6m$4fp$2@dont-email.me, "DFS" > <nospam@dfs.com> wrote: > >> On 3/29/2015 9:27 PM, Snit wrote: >>> On 3/29/15, 6:22 PM, in article mfa8fq$7c6$3@dont-email.me, "DFS" >>> <nospam@dfs.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On 3/29/2015 12:18 PM, Snit wrote: >>>>> On 3/29/15, 8:06 AM, in article mf94c6$s6t$1@dont-email.me, "DFS" >>>>> <nospam@dfs.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>>> pwnage earned by changing the case of one letter? Epic! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> owl is a tricky bastard and it's hard to get one by him. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Congrats! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks. Wish I could say it was fully on purpose. :) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> The plot thickens... you spelled it Owl by accident? >>>>>> >>>>>> That would change it from Snit pwnage to owl self-nuke, and your trophy >>>>>> must be returned. >>>>> >>>>> Fair enough. I humbly return the trophy... and grant Owl the mushroom cloud >>>>> reward. :) >>>> >>>> It's good you came clean - 5 months later - but an 'honest and >>>> honorable' man would've never let my assumption stand in the first >>>> place. I always figured you intentionally wrote 'Owl' to try and trick >>>> him, since you were in the middle of a case-sensitivity debate. >>>> >>>> Instead of admitting it right then, you took credit for it several times >>>> when I brought it up as pwnage, and said "That was fun". >>>> >>>> Why did you finally admit it wasn't intentional? >>> >>> It was fun to see him self-nuke. Never implied it was intentional. >> >> >> What? Of course you did, when you let stand many times my assumption >> that you did it intentionally. >> >> It's just more of that 'honesty and honorableness' you're crammed full of. >> >> >> >> >> > OK, your games get old but by all means please quote where I did as you say. > > You will fail. Again, I don't make accusations of your lying and dishonesty unless I have support: ================================================================================ 10/24/2014 DFS to owl: "Face it: you were pwned by Snit. You'll get him back one day." Snit response: "He will? Unlikely..." ================================================================================ 10/25/2014 DFS to owl: "And it's actually historic: you were completely pwned by Snit changing the case in just one letter." Snit response: "He will never admit it." ================================================================================ 2/14/2015: DFS: "Snit literally changed the case of /one/ letter (o to O), and took control of owl, who was insisting case-sensitivity in OSes is a good thing, but recognized Snit's case-change because in the real world OwL is case-insensitive. pwnage by changing the case of one letter?! Epic!" Snit response: "Thank you. That was fun." ================================================================================ 3/28/2015 DFS: "I had to go back and look at the original pwnage Snit made on you. Snit: "Poor Owl... he hates when I prove him wrong. Oh well." owl being pwned: "There's no "O" in my name." You recognized Owl as your name, whereas I didn't recognize Owl at all. Close but no cigar for you, hoss." Snit response: "That was excellent." ================================================================================ In each of those 4 instances, I said Snit pwned owl, and you agreed and let me think you pwned him by intentionally spelling it Owl. Turns out you did it unintentionally, and somehow figured that out 5 months later. > Then declare yourself the "winner". But go for it. Of course I win. Nobody can lose by labeling you a liar, or sarcastically referring to you as 'honest and honorable'. If you were truly honest, why did it take you 5 months to finally admit "Wish I could say it was fully on purpose."? Feels good to tell the truth, eh? You should try it more often.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-30 19:14 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D13F5132.4953F%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #286887 |
On 3/30/15, 5:50 PM, in article mfcr03$5iv$6@dont-email.me, "DFS" <nospam@dfs.com> wrote: ... >> OK, your games get old but by all means please quote where I did as you say. >> >> You will fail. > > > Again, I don't make accusations of your lying and dishonesty unless I > have support: > > ============================================================================== > == > 10/24/2014 > > DFS to owl: "Face it: you were pwned by Snit. You'll get him back one day." > > Snit response: "He will? Unlikely..." And he is still trying. OK. But no comment about me doing anything on purpose. Or not. > ============================================================================== > == > 10/25/2014 > > DFS to owl: "And it's actually historic: you were completely pwned by > Snit changing the case in just one letter." > > Snit response: "He will never admit it." No comment about me doing anything on purpose. Or not. > ============================================================================== > == > 2/14/2015: > > DFS: "Snit literally changed the case of /one/ letter (o to O), and took > control of owl, who was insisting case-sensitivity in OSes is a good > thing, but recognized Snit's case-change because in the real world OwL > is case-insensitive. pwnage by changing the case of one letter?! Epic!" > > Snit response: "Thank you. That was fun." No comment about me doing anything on purpose. Or not. I do see where you made an assumption I did not correct you one. Whatever. > ============================================================================== > == > 3/28/2015 > > DFS: "I had to go back and look at the original pwnage Snit made on you. > > Snit: "Poor Owl... he hates when I prove him wrong. Oh well." > > owl being pwned: "There's no "O" in my name." > > You recognized Owl as your name, whereas I didn't recognize Owl at all. > > Close but no cigar for you, hoss." > > Snit response: "That was excellent." > ============================================================================== > == > > In each of those 4 instances, I said Snit pwned owl, and you agreed and > let me think you pwned him by intentionally spelling it Owl. Turns out > you did it unintentionally, and somehow figured that out 5 months later. See above. > >> Then declare yourself the "winner". But go for it. > > Of course I win. Nobody can lose by labeling you a liar, or > sarcastically referring to you as 'honest and honorable'. > > If you were truly honest, why did it take you 5 months to finally admit > "Wish I could say it was fully on purpose."? > > Feels good to tell the truth, eh? You should try it more often. Why did I finally admit to something I never denied? What? Whatever. Your obsession with me is weird. -- * Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu: <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE> * Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs? <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA> * Mint KDE working with folders: <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0> * Mint KDE creating files: <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8> * Mint KDE help: <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8> * Mint KDE general navigation: <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI> * Mavericks / Pages 5.1: <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk> * OS / Word Processor Comparison: <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-28 17:09 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <c15a83af-63cf-45db-b4b9-7a9bfad531ed@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #286461 |
On Saturday, March 28, 2015 at 10:56:50 AM UTC-6, DFS wrote: > On 3/28/2015 12:26 PM, owl wrote: > > DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote: > >> John Gohde wrote: > > > >>> On Friday, March 27, 2015 at 6:46:44 PM UTC-4, owl wrote: > >>>> NTFS is not "case-insensitive, case-preserving" as has been crowed about > >>>> here forever. I recently was fooling around and found that I could > >>>> mount NTFS under linux and create files with names that differed > >>>> only in case. Even windows explorer would still show those files > >>>> in a listing. So I decided to do a little digging, and this pops > >>>> up: > >>>> > >>>> http://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/100625 > >>>> <quote> > >>>> Filenames are Case Sensitive on NTFS Volumes > >>>> > >>>> Collapse imageSUMMARY > >>>> As part of the requirements for POSIX compliance, the Windows NT File > >>>> System (NTFS) provides a case-sensitive file and directory naming > >>>> convention. Even though NTFS and the POSIX subsystem each handle > >>>> case-sensitivity well, 16-bit Windows-based, MS-DOS-based, OS/2-based, > >>>> and Win32-based applications do not. > >>>> Collapse imageMORE INFORMATION > >>>> In NTFS, you can create unique file names, stored in the same directory, > >>>> that differ only in case. For example, the following filenames can > >>>> coexist in one directory on an NTFS volume: > >>>> CASE.TXT > >>>> case.txt > >>>> case.TXT > >>>> ... > >>>> </quote> > >>>> > >>>> Did not know that. :) > >>> > >>> Ah! That probably explains why Owl is fundamentally mad, he is case sensitive - LOL. > >>> ........ the Moi cracks a joke that goes over the head of retards > > > > > >> Vitamin Dumbshit, > > > >> Who are you talking about? There's no one here by the name of Owl. > > > > LOL. Gohde just pwned you by changing the letter of one word. > > > > I had to go back and look at the original pwnage Snit made on you. > > Snit: "Poor Owl... he hates when I prove him wrong. Oh well." > > owl being pwned: "There's no "O" in my name." > > > You recognized Owl as your name, whereas I didn't recognize Owl at all. > > Close but no cigar for you, hoss. Mr. Ed? If you used a capital 'H' it would have been much more clear: http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Hoss The way it's written, you could be calling him a horse: http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/hoss
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-29 00:24 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ghdu30.f3a3@rooftop.invalid> |
| In reply to | #286516 |
Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote: > On Saturday, March 28, 2015 at 10:56:50 AM UTC-6, DFS wrote: >> On 3/28/2015 12:26 PM, owl wrote: >> > DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote: >> >> John Gohde wrote: >> > >> >>> On Friday, March 27, 2015 at 6:46:44 PM UTC-4, owl wrote: >> >>>> NTFS is not "case-insensitive, case-preserving" as has been crowed about >> >>>> here forever. I recently was fooling around and found that I could >> >>>> mount NTFS under linux and create files with names that differed >> >>>> only in case. Even windows explorer would still show those files >> >>>> in a listing. So I decided to do a little digging, and this pops >> >>>> up: >> >>>> >> >>>> http://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/100625 >> >>>> <quote> >> >>>> Filenames are Case Sensitive on NTFS Volumes >> >>>> >> >>>> Collapse imageSUMMARY >> >>>> As part of the requirements for POSIX compliance, the Windows NT File >> >>>> System (NTFS) provides a case-sensitive file and directory naming >> >>>> convention. Even though NTFS and the POSIX subsystem each handle >> >>>> case-sensitivity well, 16-bit Windows-based, MS-DOS-based, OS/2-based, >> >>>> and Win32-based applications do not. >> >>>> Collapse imageMORE INFORMATION >> >>>> In NTFS, you can create unique file names, stored in the same directory, >> >>>> that differ only in case. For example, the following filenames can >> >>>> coexist in one directory on an NTFS volume: >> >>>> CASE.TXT >> >>>> case.txt >> >>>> case.TXT >> >>>> ... >> >>>> </quote> >> >>>> >> >>>> Did not know that. :) >> >>> >> >>> Ah! That probably explains why Owl is fundamentally mad, he is case sensitive - LOL. >> >>> ........ the Moi cracks a joke that goes over the head of retards >> > >> > >> >> Vitamin Dumbshit, >> > >> >> Who are you talking about? There's no one here by the name of Owl. >> > >> > LOL. Gohde just pwned you by changing the letter of one word. >> >> >> >> I had to go back and look at the original pwnage Snit made on you. >> >> Snit: "Poor Owl... he hates when I prove him wrong. Oh well." >> >> owl being pwned: "There's no "O" in my name." >> >> >> You recognized Owl as your name, whereas I didn't recognize Owl at all. >> >> Close but no cigar for you, hoss. > Mr. Ed? If you used a capital 'H' it would have been much more clear: > http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Hoss > The way it's written, you could be calling him a horse: > http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/hoss Mrs. DFS calls me "the horse," so that might be where he got it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | DFS <nospam@dfs.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-28 22:26 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mf7nsi$7ma$12@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #286517 |
On 3/28/2015 8:24 PM, owl wrote: > Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Saturday, March 28, 2015 at 10:56:50 AM UTC-6, DFS wrote: >>> On 3/28/2015 12:26 PM, owl wrote: >>>> DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote: >>>>> John Gohde wrote: >>>> >>>>>> On Friday, March 27, 2015 at 6:46:44 PM UTC-4, owl wrote: >>>>>>> NTFS is not "case-insensitive, case-preserving" as has been crowed about >>>>>>> here forever. I recently was fooling around and found that I could >>>>>>> mount NTFS under linux and create files with names that differed >>>>>>> only in case. Even windows explorer would still show those files >>>>>>> in a listing. So I decided to do a little digging, and this pops >>>>>>> up: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/100625 >>>>>>> <quote> >>>>>>> Filenames are Case Sensitive on NTFS Volumes >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Collapse imageSUMMARY >>>>>>> As part of the requirements for POSIX compliance, the Windows NT File >>>>>>> System (NTFS) provides a case-sensitive file and directory naming >>>>>>> convention. Even though NTFS and the POSIX subsystem each handle >>>>>>> case-sensitivity well, 16-bit Windows-based, MS-DOS-based, OS/2-based, >>>>>>> and Win32-based applications do not. >>>>>>> Collapse imageMORE INFORMATION >>>>>>> In NTFS, you can create unique file names, stored in the same directory, >>>>>>> that differ only in case. For example, the following filenames can >>>>>>> coexist in one directory on an NTFS volume: >>>>>>> CASE.TXT >>>>>>> case.txt >>>>>>> case.TXT >>>>>>> ... >>>>>>> </quote> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Did not know that. :) >>>>>> >>>>>> Ah! That probably explains why Owl is fundamentally mad, he is case sensitive - LOL. >>>>>> ........ the Moi cracks a joke that goes over the head of retards >>>> >>>> >>>>> Vitamin Dumbshit, >>>> >>>>> Who are you talking about? There's no one here by the name of Owl. >>>> >>>> LOL. Gohde just pwned you by changing the letter of one word. >>> >>> >>> >>> I had to go back and look at the original pwnage Snit made on you. >>> >>> Snit: "Poor Owl... he hates when I prove him wrong. Oh well." >>> >>> owl being pwned: "There's no "O" in my name." >>> >>> >>> You recognized Owl as your name, whereas I didn't recognize Owl at all. >>> >>> Close but no cigar for you, hoss. > >> Mr. Ed? If you used a capital 'H' it would have been much more clear: > >> http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Hoss > >> The way it's written, you could be calling him a horse: > >> http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/hoss > > Mrs. DFS calls me "the horse," so that might be where he got it. On account of your stench and the way your lips work those carrots.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-28 16:09 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <bhveey0.fa03@rooftop.invalid> |
| In reply to | #286450 |
John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> wrote: > ........ the Moi cracks a joke that goes over the head of retards Congratulations.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | DFS <nospam@dfs.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-28 13:06 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mf6n1h$i4p$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #286414 |
On 3/27/2015 6:46 PM, owl wrote: > NTFS is not "case-insensitive, case-preserving" as has been crowed about > here forever.I recently was fooling around and found that I could > mount NTFS under linux and create files with names that differed > only in case. Even windows explorer would still show those files > in a listing. > So I decided to do a little digging, and this pops up: > > http://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/100625 > <quote> > Filenames are Case Sensitive on NTFS Volumes > > Collapse imageSUMMARY > As part of the requirements for POSIX compliance, the Windows NT File > System (NTFS) provides a case-sensitive file and directory naming > convention. Even though NTFS and the POSIX subsystem each handle > case-sensitivity well, 16-bit Windows-based, MS-DOS-based, OS/2-based, > and Win32-based applications do not. > Collapse imageMORE INFORMATION > In NTFS, you can create unique file names, stored in the same directory, > that differ only in case. For example, the following filenames can > coexist in one directory on an NTFS volume: > CASE.TXT > case.txt > case.TXT > ... > </quote> > > Did not know that. :) Neither does my NTFS volume on Win7-64bit. Try to copy tree.txt to Tree.txt, and Windows Explorer: "There is already a file with the same name in this location." Does that mean Windows Explorer (explorer.exe) is 32-bit? The file is found in C:\Windows. Also fails in cmd windows: "The file cannot be copied onto itself." cmd.exe is found in C:\Windows\System32, which holds 64-bit files on Win7-64 (cmd.exe is also found in C:\Windows\SysWOW64, which holds 32-bit files on Win7-64). When you run cmd in the Start box, it runs the [supposed] 64-bit version of cmd.exe (the one found in System32).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-28 17:15 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <hgheu0.paf3@rooftop.invalid> |
| In reply to | #286464 |
DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote: > On 3/27/2015 6:46 PM, owl wrote: >> NTFS is not "case-insensitive, case-preserving" as has been crowed about >> here forever.I recently was fooling around and found that I could >> mount NTFS under linux and create files with names that differed >> only in case. Even windows explorer would still show those files >> in a listing. >> So I decided to do a little digging, and this pops up: >> >> http://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/100625 >> <quote> >> Filenames are Case Sensitive on NTFS Volumes >> >> Collapse imageSUMMARY >> As part of the requirements for POSIX compliance, the Windows NT File >> System (NTFS) provides a case-sensitive file and directory naming >> convention. Even though NTFS and the POSIX subsystem each handle >> case-sensitivity well, 16-bit Windows-based, MS-DOS-based, OS/2-based, >> and Win32-based applications do not. >> Collapse imageMORE INFORMATION >> In NTFS, you can create unique file names, stored in the same directory, >> that differ only in case. For example, the following filenames can >> coexist in one directory on an NTFS volume: >> CASE.TXT >> case.txt >> case.TXT >> ... >> </quote> >> >> Did not know that. :) > Neither does my NTFS volume on Win7-64bit. > Try to copy tree.txt to Tree.txt, and > Windows Explorer: "There is already a file with the same name in this > location." > Does that mean Windows Explorer (explorer.exe) is 32-bit? The file is > found in C:\Windows. > Also fails in cmd windows: "The file cannot be copied onto itself." > cmd.exe is found in C:\Windows\System32, which holds 64-bit files on > Win7-64 (cmd.exe is also found in C:\Windows\SysWOW64, which holds > 32-bit files on Win7-64). > When you run cmd in the Start box, it runs the [supposed] 64-bit version > of cmd.exe (the one found in System32). I didn't quote the whole page. Here's the rest: <quote> ... Other inconsistencies also exist. The Windows NT Command Prompt and File Manager correctly display the names of the files. However, normal commands, such as COPY, fail when you attempt to access one or more filenames that differ only in case. NTFS supports two slightly different modes of operation that can be selected by the subsystem of the application interacting with NTFS. The first is fully case sensitive and demands that file names supplied by the application match the names stored on disk including case if the file on disk is to be selected. The second mode of operation is case preserving but not case sensitive. This means that applications can select files on the disk even if the supplied name differs in case from the name stored on the disk. Note that both modes preserve the case used to create the files. The difference in behavior noted here applies only when an application needs to locate an existing file. POSIX takes advantage of the full case sensitive mode, while MS-DOS, WOW, and Win32 subsystems use the case insensitive mode. </quote>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-28 17:28 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <bhf93.hjrow@rooftop.invalid> |
| In reply to | #286470 |
owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote: > DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote: >> On 3/27/2015 6:46 PM, owl wrote: >>> NTFS is not "case-insensitive, case-preserving" as has been crowed about >>> here forever.I recently was fooling around and found that I could >>> mount NTFS under linux and create files with names that differed >>> only in case. Even windows explorer would still show those files >>> in a listing. >>> So I decided to do a little digging, and this pops up: >>> >>> http://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/100625 >>> <quote> >>> Filenames are Case Sensitive on NTFS Volumes >>> >>> Collapse imageSUMMARY >>> As part of the requirements for POSIX compliance, the Windows NT File >>> System (NTFS) provides a case-sensitive file and directory naming >>> convention. Even though NTFS and the POSIX subsystem each handle >>> case-sensitivity well, 16-bit Windows-based, MS-DOS-based, OS/2-based, >>> and Win32-based applications do not. >>> Collapse imageMORE INFORMATION >>> In NTFS, you can create unique file names, stored in the same directory, >>> that differ only in case. For example, the following filenames can >>> coexist in one directory on an NTFS volume: >>> CASE.TXT >>> case.txt >>> case.TXT >>> ... >>> </quote> >>> >>> Did not know that. :) >> Neither does my NTFS volume on Win7-64bit. >> Try to copy tree.txt to Tree.txt, and >> Windows Explorer: "There is already a file with the same name in this >> location." >> Does that mean Windows Explorer (explorer.exe) is 32-bit? The file is >> found in C:\Windows. >> Also fails in cmd windows: "The file cannot be copied onto itself." >> cmd.exe is found in C:\Windows\System32, which holds 64-bit files on >> Win7-64 (cmd.exe is also found in C:\Windows\SysWOW64, which holds >> 32-bit files on Win7-64). >> When you run cmd in the Start box, it runs the [supposed] 64-bit version >> of cmd.exe (the one found in System32). > I didn't quote the whole page. Here's the rest: > <quote> > ... > Other inconsistencies also exist. The Windows NT Command Prompt and > File Manager correctly display the names of the files. However, normal > commands, such as COPY, fail when you attempt to access one or more > filenames that differ only in case. > NTFS supports two slightly different modes of operation that can be > selected by the subsystem of the application interacting with NTFS. The > first is fully case sensitive and demands that file names supplied > by the application match the names stored on disk including case if > the file on disk is to be selected. The second mode of operation is > case preserving but not case sensitive. This means that applications > can select files on the disk even if the supplied name differs in case > from the name stored on the disk. Note that both modes preserve the case > used to create the files. The difference in behavior noted here applies > only when an application needs to locate an existing file. POSIX takes > advantage of the full case sensitive mode, while MS-DOS, WOW, and Win32 > subsystems use the case insensitive mode. > </quote> Oh, and this KB article was written for NT 3.1. So it's not a 32-bit vs 64-bit thing. NTFS has apparently been fully case-sensitive from the get-go.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-28 18:35 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <xfdeo.gjr7@rooftop.invalid> |
| In reply to | #286473 |
owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote: > owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote: >> DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote: >>> cmd.exe is found in C:\Windows\System32, which holds 64-bit files on >>> Win7-64 (cmd.exe is also found in C:\Windows\SysWOW64, which holds >>> 32-bit files on Win7-64). >>> When you run cmd in the Start box, it runs the [supposed] 64-bit version >>> of cmd.exe (the one found in System32). >> I didn't quote the whole page. Here's the rest: >> <quote> >> ... >> Other inconsistencies also exist. The Windows NT Command Prompt and >> File Manager correctly display the names of the files. However, normal >> commands, such as COPY, fail when you attempt to access one or more >> filenames that differ only in case. >> NTFS supports two slightly different modes of operation that can be >> selected by the subsystem of the application interacting with NTFS. The >> first is fully case sensitive and demands that file names supplied >> by the application match the names stored on disk including case if >> the file on disk is to be selected. The second mode of operation is >> case preserving but not case sensitive. This means that applications >> can select files on the disk even if the supplied name differs in case >> from the name stored on the disk. Note that both modes preserve the case >> used to create the files. The difference in behavior noted here applies >> only when an application needs to locate an existing file. POSIX takes >> advantage of the full case sensitive mode, while MS-DOS, WOW, and Win32 >> subsystems use the case insensitive mode. >> </quote> > Oh, and this KB article was written for NT 3.1. So it's not a 32-bit > vs 64-bit thing. NTFS has apparently been fully case-sensitive from > the get-go. Here's what I get: root@thinkpad:~# mount |grep win /dev/sda2 on /win type fuseblk (rw,nosuid,nodev,allow_other,blksize=4096) root@thinkpad:~# fdisk -l |grep sda2 /dev/sda2 192 18853 149899264 7 HPFS/NTFS root@thinkpad:~# cd /win/Users/owl/test root@thinkpad:/win/Users/owl/test# ls root@thinkpad:/win/Users/owl/test# touch foo.txt FOO.txt root@thinkpad:/win/Users/owl/test# echo "blah" > foo.txt root@thinkpad:/win/Users/owl/test# echo "dfs" > FOO.txt root@thinkpad:/win/Users/owl/test# ls -l total 1 -rwxrwxrwx 1 root root 5 2015-03-28 13:45 foo.txt -rwxrwxrwx 1 root root 4 2015-03-28 13:45 FOO.txt root@thinkpad:/win/Users/owl/test# cat foo.txt blah root@thinkpad:/win/Users/owl/test# cat FOO.txt dfs root@thinkpad:/win/Users/owl/test# cd root@thinkpad:~# umount /dev/sda2 root@thinkpad:~# exit logout owl@thinkpad:~$ Screenshot of file list under Windows 7 (64-bit): http://i.imgur.com/uMP2GXu.png Windows lets me open both files, but they both contain "dfs." The file that had that text has a later modification date. That might determine which file is actually opened with the names. It does not overwrite the other file, even though it also shows "dfs" instead of "blah." Later, booting back into linux, the original date is intact: owl@thinkpad:~$ sudo -i root@thinkpad:~# mount /dev/sda2 /win root@thinkpad:~# cd /win/Users/owl/test root@thinkpad:/win/Users/owl/test# ls -l total 1 -rwxrwxrwx 1 root root 5 2015-03-28 13:45 foo.txt -rwxrwxrwx 1 root root 4 2015-03-28 13:45 FOO.txt root@thinkpad:/win/Users/owl/test# cat foo.txt blah root@thinkpad:/win/Users/owl/test# cat FOO.txt dfs root@thinkpad:/win/Users/owl/test#
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-03-29 12:57 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <bvj.a3f4@rooftop.invalid> |
| In reply to | #286464 |
DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote: > On 3/27/2015 6:46 PM, owl wrote: >> NTFS is not "case-insensitive, case-preserving" as has been crowed about ... >> >> Did not know that. :) > Neither does my NTFS volume on Win7-64bit. > Try to copy tree.txt to Tree.txt, and > Windows Explorer: "There is already a file with the same name in this > location." > Does that mean Windows Explorer (explorer.exe) is 32-bit? The file is > found in C:\Windows. > Also fails in cmd windows: "The file cannot be copied onto itself." > cmd.exe is found in C:\Windows\System32, which holds 64-bit files on > Win7-64 (cmd.exe is also found in C:\Windows\SysWOW64, which holds > 32-bit files on Win7-64). > When you run cmd in the Start box, it runs the [supposed] 64-bit version > of cmd.exe (the one found in System32). This is on a Server 2008 R2 Datacenter 64bit VM: http://i.imgur.com/3860ovn.png Utilities and SDK for SUA installed and configured. checked custom installation. checked to install everything. In config options there was a checkbox to enable case-sensitive default. This SUA is not available for WIn 7 pro. Have to upgrade to ultimate or use a server os. cygwin should do the same, but that SUA case-sensitive default option i believe sets a registry setting that you may have to set manually. https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc732389.aspx <quote> Subsystem for UNIX-based Applications and Case Sensitivity </quote> https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc725747.aspx <quote> Configure Case Sensitivity for File and Folder Names </quote>
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.advocacy
csiph-web