Re: [tlug] NTFS mounting: Writes Eschewed by Red Hat

[Jim <jep200404@example.com>]

Huh? What did you mean to say. 

On Sat, 18 Nov 2006 14:36:39 +0100 Godwin Stewart <godwin.stewart@example.com> wrote:

> On Sat, 18 Nov 2006 08:23:39 -0500, Jim <jep200404@example.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > Red Hat is more cautious, more conservative. They don't see
> > writing to NTFS as stable enough.
> 
> Nobody said anything about writing.

Au contraire. 

Earlier in the thread, in a letter that you replied to, Tenga Wataru wrote:

> Readable only, or also writable? Most of the distributions that are not
> RedHat/Fedora can mount NTFS partitions rather easily as read-only. If
> you want to write to NTFS, it generally means some extra installation
> and configuration, plus the risk of messing up file attributes on the
> NTFS partitions. 

It seems to me that Tenga Wataru wrote about writing to NTFS partitions, 
both explicitly as in "also writable" and "If you want to write to NTFS" 
and implicitly with the mentions of "read-only". 

Godwin quoted Tenga Wataru without attribution: 

> "Most of the distributions that are not RedHat/Fedora can mount NTFS
> partitions rather easily as read-only."

Who's point are you trying to make?