I have two computers and installed ubuntu in one computer and windows7 in one computer. I would like to access ubuntu files from windows7.
How can i access ubuntu files from windows7?
There are several solutions you can use, like this two:
Ext2Fsd
Ext2Read
Second solution doesn't even have to be installed - you can just run .exe file and access partitions you want.
However, this solutions are 100% safe only for reading. If you need to read and write to Ubuntu partition often, you should create shared NTFS partition which you could access from both operating systems.
Related
When reading the WSL documentation, it is stated that:
"Unlike our practice with trying to exclusively install programs and software on Ubuntu, our files and folders need to live exclusively on the Windows FS [...] Windows and Windows Apps can only read and write Windows files, and VSCode will be making our changes."
I understand the reasoning behind this and indeed, if one uses VSCode for example, it all makes sense. But my question is:
Is there any real reason why you couldn't keep your files (i.e. scripts) on the WSL filesystem itself? More specifically, if you don't ever intend to use the Windows filesystem (i.e you won't ever need a GUI or else), is there any sense in placing the files in the Windows FS?
Obviously you need to make sure you backup your data (GitHub or else) but aside from that, is there any downside? I guess what I'm saying is: can I use WSL like a VM? Can I keep BOTH software AND scripts all in WSL, separate from the Windows filesystem?
PS: The reason for avoiding a VM in this context is because I have a low spec laptop which has struggled a lot in the past with VMs (slow, not enough RAM), and so far, WSL seems be running much more smoothly.
Thanks
The simple answer is yes, you can use WSL as if it were a VM. WSL is for the most part fully-fledged Linux, and you can use Linux as your primary operating system, ignoring the fact you need to start it from within Windows. I haven't tried WSL 2, but it's said to be implemented as a fast VM, which is exactly what you ask for. (Further, the lack of GUIs can be mitigated using built in support for sending X data over SSH to the Windows half of your computer, and display it with an X Server. If I remember correctly, these two articles got me most of my way there.)
However, if you want to get pedantic, you can't store any files separate from your Windows filesystem on WSL 1. If you run e.g. Ubuntu, your Linux filesystem is instead always contained within %USERPROFILE%\AppData\Local\Packages\CanonicalGroupLimited.Ubuntu18.04onWindows_79rhkp1fndgsc\LocalState, so it'll technically not be separate. I can't test WSL 2, but according to this article, WSL 2 also stores its data in that folder, just as a single VDHX image. Presumably every WSL distro stores its data on the Windows filesystem.
Warning: Do not access the files themselves in your Linux filesystem within AppData using Windows tools, or you run a high risk of corrupting those files.
Yes, you can, and only place files in the Windows filesystem if you want to share them with Windows programs. Moreover, in Windows 1903 you don't need to place files in Windows filesystem to share them with Windows Programs, they can access them.
In WSL2 they encourage you to keep everything in WSL filesystem to take advantage of the filesystem's performance improve.
So, yes you can and you should.
I have a project and the files are on Guest OS (Red Hat Enterprise Linux) with Virtualbox, my host OS is Mac OS. I used to coding right in RHEL with editor Atom. But my boss told me that it's inefficient to code in a Guest OS, well, it makes sense because Mac OS or Windows is more responsive than linux, so I changed my way:
Copy the whole project located on RHEL to a share folder between Mac OS and RHEL using rsync
Code with Atom in Mac OS
Copy back the project in share folder to the original project in RHEL by rsync
I'm using Atom (not vim in RHEL) because it can edit the whole project in one window which is convenient for my situation. But there is a problem: after copying back the project in Step 3, git status shows everything has been changed even though I just edited only a few files. That is a little annoying.
Is there any better way to code in such environment? any advice is appreciated.
BretzL's suggestion to use shared folders is a good one, but I think it's important to address the underlying issue: your boss' assumption about coding being inefficient or slow just because you're working on a VM is simply not true.
It sounds like your new workflow, which was instituted as a result of his/her advice, is causing you to have a harder time developing that you did on the VM. The shared folders will help with that, but if you have the VM configured to have access to enough cores and memory, then its performance for most tasks will be fine, and there may not be any problem with developing on the VM directly. I do a significant amount of development on a VM, and haven't had any issues. You may experience slower builds on the VM if you're building whole kernels or other large projects, but if that's not the case, it should be fine.
If you didn't have any performance or productivity problems before forcing yourself to work outside of the VM, then... it wasn't a problem.
(I also have an issue with the assumption that Linux is always less responsive than Windows or Mac OS, but that's a debate for a different day.)
VirtualBox supports shared folders, so you dont need to rsync back and forth. Just mount the shared folder into where your application server on RHEL guest expects the code.
I also recommend you take a look at https://www.vagrantup.com/ for managing developer VMs.
apologies for vague description but essentially I have a Linux box (Ubuntu) which has three drives. The first drive is formatted with a Linux format (I'm not sure which one but probably irrelevant) and the second and third drives are NTFS as they have been shares on a windows network.
Can I just reformat the first drive to NTFS and install windows? Would I expect windows to see drives 2 and 3 as they are already NTFS drives?
Thanks
Backup/Image your system before doing any changes, if the system is critical.
Yes, begin Windows installation process. There will be a point in the installation where you will be asked to select the drive/partition on which Windows should be installed. Your first drive will be listed. You can wipe it off and choose the entire drive for Windows. Default NTFS will be created for you.
If you have trouble, create gparted live CD and boot system with it. It will allow you to wipe off the first drive. Then install Windows on that drive.
Yes, Windows will see drive 2 and 3.
Also, you will get some nice help on https://serverfault.com/ if there are complications with disk setup (RAID/LVM etc.).
I have both linux and windows installed on my pc. when I make some programs in lex and yacc (when working on linux)and store all the files in a folder ,they are corrupted If I use windows for some time. for example 3 days back after storing all the files( xyz.l , a.out ) I switched to windows for some other work after rebooting my pc. after 3 days when I again open that folder(while using linux) a.out was converted into an image and when I double clicked on it, an image opened. the image was same which I downloaded 2 days back while working on windows but I stored in some other folder. so does the memory space used for storage for linux and windows overlap? if not what could be the reasons? It has happened 2 times. and really I have to recode all my programs . I am not able to understand why?
It is not supposed to overlap.This sounds like a configuration problem , where windows and linux are configured to mount the same partition.
Check the file /etc/fstab (under linux) and find out whether this is true.You can try making files in various places and observe if they can be found on the other os.
I don't know how your partitioning looks like, but I guess that it is set up in a way that both OS have read/write access to all partitions, or at least windows has read/write access to the Linux partition.
Is your linux partition a FAT32 partition? You should set it to read only in windows, but I'm not sure how to do this.
Do you use hibernate on the windows side? Windows can get confused if data changes while it is asleep, and this might be the cause of the problems.
I did something wrong with my dual-OS PC (XP Pro and Ubuntu) and it now only works when booting from an Ubuntu Live CD (8.04 LTS).
I am backing up my data to an external HDD for reinstalling everying. I am not worried about the Linux part of my data because the external HDD is formatted in ext3, the file system Ubuntu operates on.
But what about the Windows part of my data? Does Linux (the live CD) properly copy NTFS files into an ext3 HDD? And then does Linux (this time, the newly installed Linux system on PC) properly copy them back to the NTFS partition?
I know I am asking a very simple question. I am sorry if I appear to ask someone to do my homework but I cannot experiment myself now.
Thanks you all in advance!
Edit:
Is it perhaps better to format the external HDD in fat32?
As amemus said, fat32 would be better for the external HDD. Even though it's Microsoft, fat32 is still, by far, the most supported HDD format.
That said, what you said SHOULD work, given you use a new-ish distro of linux with new packages.
Ubuntu 8.04 is very old these days, but I believe it had good support for NTFS read (using the old ntfs driver). It will correctly copy your Windows files to the ext3 external hard drive, plus or minus some attributes/permissions which have no equivalent in ext3.
Newer Ubuntu releases have full NTFS read/write support via the ntfs-3g driver which I have found to work very well.
Sidenote: I have found NTFS is a reasonably good filesystem for external hard drives - it works well for Windows and recent Linux computers, and it's technically superior to FAT32. The only issue is if you have to interact with Apple OSX, which still doesn't understand NTFS. (You can make OSX understand NTFS with a liberal application of FUSE and ntfs-3g, but it's not nice.)
Note: This is probably the wrong Stack Exchange - StackOverflow is for programming questions. Maybe the Ubuntu stackexchange would have been better?
Ubuntu shouldn't have a problem reading from NTFS.
Writing to NTFS used to be very difficult, but its gotten a lot better (a simple google search turns up lots of results)
As long as you aren't working with large (~4GB) files, FAT32 will be easier to work with across lots of different platforms.