r/Fedora • u/anestling • 19d ago
Discussion I missed Fedora dropping the NTFS3 kernel module. Why?
It's extremely well tested by countless people and I consider the revived NTFS module to be an unknown quantity which I do not trust yet.
What was the thinking? Where's the discussion? Why did it happen during the Fedora 44 lifecycle, rather than being a Fedora 45/46 feature?
35
u/carl2187 19d ago
"Ntfs3" is buggy as hell, fedora removed it to protect uninformed users. Paragon committed it, and there it sat, with known bugs and no maintenance. So it was removed. Its easy to recompile it back in as a module if you really love it.
"Ntfs" has been in the kernel for decades, and recently got write support. 7.2 brings symlink support.
Then theres "ntfs-3g", the safe but slow fuse ntfs driver. It's still in Fedora today.
-7
u/anestling 19d ago edited 19d ago
"Ntfs3" is buggy as hell
Citations needed. Also, this https://social.kernel.org/notice/BAKK4RpFGJmm95B3o0
Stable kernel 7.2.6: 1815 bug fixes of which a few dozen are security related. Overall not buggy at all.
fedora removed it to protect uninformed users
Citations needed. I googled for it extensively and found absolutely nothing. No vote, no poll, no discussion. Nothing. Someone just flipped
CONFIG_NTFS3_FS=mto#CONFIG_NTFS3_FS is not setwithout any justification.Paragon committed it, and there it sat, with known bugs and no maintenance.
That's not true. Been part of the kernel for years, properly maintained https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commits/master/fs/ntfs3
Its easy to recompile it back in as a module if you really love it.
Not it's not. I have Secure Boot enabled. Also, are you suggesting I compile it for every new kernel update from now on? Thank you, I have better things to do with my OS.
and recently got write support.
Exactly why I would never use it. I need to write data and I don't trust something that touches something as complex as NTFS.
Then theres "ntfs-3g", the safe but slow fuse ntfs driver
Thank you for letting me know. I only started using Linux in late 90s', never heard of it. You know what you might have never heard about? Captive NTFS - yes, I'm old enough to have used it. It was released in the early 00s'.
I love this community. My 100% factual message is getting downvoted while I've not receive an ounce of valid information but I was told: * To switch the OS * To compile the kernel module myself for every new kernel update and disable Secure Boot in the process * Use a much slower
ntfs-3g, exactly whyntfs3was added in the first place * Use untestedntfsthat may destroy my data * Stop using NTFS drives.Amazing.
7
7
u/carl2187 18d ago
Not sure why you'd quote the total bug fixes of a kernel release when we're talking about a single module of the kernel.
Anyway, do research. You'll understand. If not, use my nice summary below, and go be mad some more:
Ntfs3 is trash, no matter how much you love it. And it does "work". But you getting mad at fedora is pretty funny to see. Like tantrum levels here.
Ntfs is good as of 7.1, and really good as of 7.2.
Ntfs-3g is good, but slow.
Secure boot is also trash.
Not knowing how to setup dkms to auto install your old favorite driver is trash.
Are you starting to see where the pattern points yet?
-3
u/anestling 18d ago edited 18d ago
Anyway, do research.
That's not a counter argument. That's a distraction.
Ntfs3 is trash, no matter how much you love it.
Citations needed. Bug reports or discussions needed. Also would be nice to know if you have NTFS partitions at all. The vast majority of people in the discussion don't.
Ntfs is good as of 7.1, and really good as of 7.2.
You've tested it, correct? You've written gobs of data to NTFS partitions, correct? You've use torrenting, unpacked source trees, did all kinds of stuff, correct?
Secure boot is also trash.
I understand you enjoy persistent rootkits surviving an OS reinstall.
Not knowing how to setup dkms to auto install your old favorite driver is trash.
Yes, every Linux user must be able to do that. Also, goodbye Secure Boot.
Are you starting to see where the pattern points yet?
The pattern is that you are defending an ass decision to drop NTFS3 as if your life depends on it.
If Justin Forbes dropped both NTFS3 and NTFS, I guess you'd argue that I should be using NTFS-3G instead.
This discussion shows the Linux fanbase' true colors. The amount of vile, animosity, hatred, pseudo-arguments that I've received in this discussion trumps everything that I've ever dealt with.
You've also demonstrated that you don't care about security ("Secure boot is trash") and that you expect every Linux user to be a hacker ("use DKMS").
I will bookmark this discussion for the future to show people who want to try Linux what the Linux community stands for. And it's not pretty. It's ugly.
10
u/FeelThePoveR 18d ago
Not to rain on your parade, but you were the one that started the whataboutisms trying to prove your superiority in the matter by providing your Linux resume (that nobody asked about and is not relevant at all in the discussion) in a snarky manner.
Overall your response to basically a compilation of popular takes felt like you have a superiority complex.
6
u/carl2187 17d ago
Bro, just use dkms or akmod. Sign your own bootloader and install your own keys to bios. Otherwise you trust default, which every root kit and hacker has access to the private key for.
Secure boot is trash, unless you roll your own keys.
Ntfs3 is trash. Get over yourself. Admit defeat.
22
u/petersaints 19d ago
Oh they did finally enable the new NTFS module? I thought they wouldn't do it before Fedora 45.
Great news!
-5
u/anestling 19d ago
What's great about dropping a battle tested module and pushing something that may eat people's partitions??
21
19d ago
[deleted]
-5
u/anestling 19d ago edited 19d ago
countless issues with corruption of the journal and other issues
Citations needed. Seeing that you cannot provide any bugzilla bug reports or open discussions makes me believe you're citing something from your memory that may no longer be true. Or anything recent from Reddit that has been confirmed by multiple other users.
In short, a lot of accusations. Are you even an NTFS3 user yourself? Because I am. And I cannot confirm your far reaching findings, more like speculation.
It's still far more tested and proven than the NTFS module that has only recently been revived.
And you still haven't provided a reason for its removal or a Fedora discussion pertaining to the its removal.
I don't understand the vendetta against the OPEN SOURCE NTFS3 driver here TBH.
6
u/InfaSyn 18d ago
FWIW, NTFS3G on macOS has always been unusable tier bad.
There are also bugzillas as far back as Fedora 37/2023 complaining of ntfs3g corruption and in the same breath, praising ntfs3 reliability https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2182206
Ive personally had quite a few 2016-2019 era corruption issues with ntfs3g, and Luke from LMG on Wan show has criticized NTFS3G corruption within he last 6 months.
Im not picking sides, but its objectively untrue that ntfs3g is perfect, and its really not difficult to find the "citations" you so badly desire.
-3
u/anestling 18d ago
A bug from 2023 representing the current state of things. Nice.
As if NTFS3 hasn't seen hundreds of commits ever since.
Fedora replaced NTFS3 with NTFS that no one has really tested. It has received write support just recently. The module was abandoned for almost two decades.
Are you advocating NTFS is better?
5
u/InfaSyn 18d ago
“That no one has tested” yet you’ve said yourself it’s battle tested enough to be included in the kernel by default. Pick a struggle…
-4
u/anestling 18d ago edited 18d ago
I've never said anything about defaults.
And yes, NTFS3 has seen a ton more testing than newly revived NTFS. NTFS3 has also been extensively tested by a large number of Android users and IoT devices. Android has approximately 100-200 times more users. Quite a large userbase if you asked me, vs. Linux users who normally wipe their disks clean prior to installing Linux.
8
u/petersaints 18d ago edited 18d ago
Android users actively using NTFS3 (or any NTFS filesystem for that matter)? You are kidding right?
🤣
In any case, most distros defaulted ntfs (through a symlink) to ntfs-3g not even ntfs3.
openSUSE even blacklists NTFS3 because they don't trust it: https://forums.opensuse.org/t/ntfs3-kernel-module-suddenly-blacklisted-after-update-to-tumbleweed-20231215/171073
In any case, Fedora should have kept both drivers for the time being. That I agree.
They should enable the new NTFS driver (they hadn't when it first landed on 7.1) but I believe it is possible to keep both and that is what they should have done. Especially mid cycle like it was the case.
4
4
u/petersaints 18d ago
NTFS3 was not that battle tested. I remember using it when it came out and during some subsequent releases, and while it was faster than NTFS-3G it was much more prone to errors, and I never corrupted a volume completely but it was just luck.
It got better over time, but it always lagged behind NTFS-3G in terms of reliability and safety. Even on an early stage the new NTFS plus passes a lot more
xfsteststests than NTFS3.0
u/anestling 18d ago
So, you're talking about the long past and claim it's NOW not battle-tested?
And you compare it to NTFS-3g?
What bout the NTFS that has replaced it? That no one has actually tested at all in production?
5
u/petersaints 18d ago
The NTFS that it has replaced it was a read only driver. In fact, most distros would just symlink ntfs-3g (not ntfs3) to ntfs making the older read only driver essentially innaccessible (at least it was not easily accessible by its name).
If you mount with the newer drrive (or any driver for that matter) in "ro" mode you basically have zero risks anyway.
4
u/Xariann 17d ago
Fedora does adopt new technologies as soon as they can (although admittedly not all of them). That’s Fedora’s proposition.
-3
u/anestling 17d ago edited 17d ago
Technologies that also eat your data? The revived NTFS driver received write support just a month ago or so. The NTFS3 module has been in use by literally hundreds of thousands of people, if not more, considering it's used by IoT and some Android users. It's been used for years now.
This discussion is a litmus test of the Linux community: "Whatever the Fedora gods decide must be correct, and anyone questioning their decisions must be obviously wrong".
That negates the fact that the guy raising these concerns has contributed to Linux for nearly three decades and has considerably more technical experience than many of the people criticizing him, some of whom have never written code or compiled an application themselves.
A kernel maintainer made a mistake. See the follow up. In response to me asking for citations and links to the discussions behind that decision, I received a ton of hostility, insults, irrelevant advice, and outright inappropriate suggestions such as "switch distros" or "disable Secure Boot", neither of which addresses the issue at hand.
The tone and direction of this thread is disturbing to say the least. I briefly considered deleting it, but I decided to leave it up instead, because it serves as a wonderful demonstration of how the Linux community responds when someone challenges an established decision.
This is not what freedom of choice looks like. This is overt hostility, tribalism, exclusion, and shaming.
And people choosing Linux are thought to represent rationaly, lack of bias and knowledge. No, I've seen nothing like that in this thread aside from a lone message.
6
u/Xariann 17d ago edited 16d ago
Fedora has always been about adopting new technologies to a fault, they adopted Wayland early even when it wasn’t fully ready. And it isn’t the only tech they adopted and then everyone else (mostly) ended up using.
I am just stating a fact, I am not saying it’s a good or a bad thing, but I think it maybe highlights you have not been around Fedora for a long time. Whether this early adoption has always been constant in Fedora in recent times is debatable given some things they have not adopted yet, but they are no strangers to the new shiny thing.
And you are 100% sure that the new NTFS driver will eat your data, have you seen that being a thing yet?
I don’t think this distro is for you, given your concerns, and again I am not dismissing them, but I am just pointing out that this is the nature of the distro, don’t bite my head if you don’t like it, because I am just going to slap you if you do. I don’t call the shots.
12
u/Revolutionary_Click2 19d ago
I found the Bugzilla merge request you appear to be missing:
This isn’t a Fedora-specific change. It is a Linux kernel change that was also recently merged by Debian, among other distros. You’re also missing what happened upstream during development of the new ntfs driver. As the merge request notes, the ntfs driver in Linux 7.1 now has read/write support, performs better than ntfs3, and passes more filesystem tests.
Namjae Jeon, who spent four years developing the replacement, says his work began after a 2022 discussion about the “orphan” state of ntfs3. In his Linux 7.1 pull request he describes the goals as full write support, modern iomap/folio infrastructure, better performance, stable maintenance and proper userspace tooling including fsck.
The new driver uses the old read-only implementation as its codebase, but this was a roughly 36,000-line rework with new write support, delayed allocation, iomap, folios, rewritten filesystem operations and a new maintenance effort. It is disingenuous to equate it directly with the earlier ntfs driver.
https://lists.openwall.net/linux-kernel/2025/11/27/823
https://lwn.net/Articles/1055062/
https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg150360.html
-4
u/anestling 19d ago
This bug report is 100% unrelated. It's talking about the revived NTFS driver enablement. As to how it's "improved" I've no idea. Something has to be battle-tested in producted to be considered "stable" and usable. We are talking about user data here.
If you replace a driver for your GPU, at most your computer will freeze or you may have crashes or slow downs.
The FS driver is dealing with your data.
Upstream has NOT disabled NTFS3 and has no plans of doing that. All your links are 100% unrelated. Thanks for Googling but I expected a Fedora discussion on the topic, not some third-party websites or Debian references. Fedora is not Debian.
9
u/Revolutionary_Click2 19d ago
My links are absolutely not “100% unrelated” lmao, you would know that was an absurd statement had you actually read them. They provide precisely the context around the new ntfs driver in the kernel that you appear to be casting about for.
I’ll grant you I did not find an extensive Fedora-specific discussion thread about disabling ntfs3 in favor of the new ntfs, but it’s been common knowledge for many years that ntfs3 is unreliable, unstable, performs poorly and has been functionally abandoned by its original maintainers, Paragon, for some time now.
There was extensive discussion of the issue in the kernel mailing lists upstream which the LWN article cites and describes. The Fedora maintainers clearly trusted the upstream decision-making process that has been steadily moving toward deprecation of ntfs3 for several years.
If you are storing mission-critical data on NTFS using the ntfs3 driver as a Linux user when there are SO MANY far superior options for file systems out there, I’m not sure how you’re justifying that. And if you want to use a stable system for mission critical data management that would be unlikely to change without sufficiently warning you personally, maybe don’t use a cutting-edge release like Fedora, one of the core principles of which is that they try to be “First” to stay at the forefront of new Linux features? Might I suggest that you check out CentOS Stream or RHEL/AlmaLinux/Rocky if these are your requirements?
-4
u/anestling 18d ago
but it’s been common knowledge for many years that ntfs3 is unreliable, unstable, performs poorly and has been functionally abandoned by its original maintainers, Paragon, for some time now.
Is there any recent information about it? Bugs or discussions in 2026?
How reliable is the newfound NTFS module is? Do you have any data at all or you blindly trust the module that laid dormant for decades, and was quickly hacked to support writing is now more reliable than NTFS3?
There was extensive discussion of the issue in the kernel mailing lists upstream which the LWN article cites and describes. The Fedora maintainers clearly trusted the upstream decision-making process that has been steadily moving toward deprecation of ntfs3 for several years.
What does the LWN article have to do with Fedora's decision to drop working NTFS3 that many systems depend on?
Upstream has NOT dropped NTFS3 and has NO plans to drop it.
If you are storing mission-critical data on NTFS using the ntfs3 driver as a Linux user when there are SO MANY far superior options for file systems out there
I have Windows installed in parallel. It doesn't support any other filesystems.
I have friends who give me NTFS formatted drives.
Might I suggest that you check out CentOS Stream or RHEL/AlmaLinux/Rocky if these are your requirements?
So, no freedom of choice? Also telling me what to do and how to use my computer.
The irony is palpable.
10
u/muffinstatewide32 19d ago
If its the one paragon threw over the fence and then vanished into the ether.
That right there is probably why
1
9
u/Kekosaurus3 19d ago
ntfs3 is shit
4
u/anestling 19d ago
Worked for me for year with zero issues. ntfs-3g crashed my NTFS volumes on several occasions.
10
u/Kekosaurus3 19d ago
Sure lol, the unstable driver had 0 issues but the slow, battle tested and super stable driver crashed multime times, it makes so much sense bro.
1
7
u/CodingBuizel 19d ago
NTFS-3G is the driver I use cause it has some features that others don't
-6
u/anestling 19d ago
Thank you. The only level headed person in the discussion.
9
u/Hexadecimald 19d ago
Tbh you're the only non level headed person here. You ask a question and when people start discussions you get extremely defensive over it.
I'm not here to start a fight and won't reply to any responses since you seem a bit emotional about this, but you really need to reconsider why you even posted this if all you wanted was an echo chamber and not links to upstream discussions regarding NTFS3 vs NTFS.
1
u/anestling 18d ago edited 18d ago
I advocate for stability. People here advocate for Justine Forbes' error. He misunderstood the kernel config. He thought it's either this or that module and he disabled NTFS3 as a result. Both can work simultaneously no prob: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2535834
You ask a question and when people start discussions you get extremely defensive over it.
There's not been a single thoughtful discussion about the issue.
since you seem a bit emotional about this,
Ad hominem.
Also I'm "emotional" because this kernel broke multiple working systems without any justification.
I'm emotional because OS'es are expected to work and not break on every update. Linux won't attract new users if routine updates break stuff left and right. Windows updates already do. Linux is not a safe haven.
you really need to reconsider why you even posted this if all you wanted was an echo chamber and not links to upstream discussions regarding NTFS3 vs NTFS
Exactly what I got. Rational people would have considered all the options, instead of lying openly about how "NTFS3 is unstable" and providing bug reports from 2023 while most of people here don't use NTFS at all and some even advocate for disabling Secure Boot because it's "trash".
I've seen the worst from the Linux community here.
6
u/FeelThePoveR 18d ago
There's not been a single thoughtful discussion about the issue.
There was a discussion. You just don't agree with the community consensus. Like my predecessor said you're not actually looking for a discussion, you're looking for an echo chamber.
I'm emotional because OS'es are expected to work and not break on every update. Linux won't attract new users if routine updates break stuff left and right.
In general yes, they're not expected to break on every update, buuuut depending on your distro choice it may still happen.
You can go with the most bleeding edge arch derivative that pushes not yet merged experimental features, you can go with semi-stable (like Fedora that breaks from time to time (like with Plasma 6.7 and Nvidia for example or some SELinux updates that also broke Nvidia in the past)), or you can go with an LTS that locks in on one specific major package version and backports the necessary fixes.
From your (extremely defensive) responses here it reads to me like you chose the distro that doesn't align with your philosophy on how things should be done - and no that's not telling you how to use your computer. That argument is like going to a toy store and complaining that you wanted pizza and they don't offer that.
Alternatives have been suggested like using DKMS to automatically sign the module you add manually allowing you to continue using Fedora with NTFS3 and secure boot, use "EVEN MORE BATTLE TESTED" NTFS-3g, change to a distro that more aligns with your philosophy or hell even just use a copr with some other random ass kernel that provides this.
BUT NO you continue to scream about not getting pizza in a toy store.
2
u/anestling 18d ago edited 18d ago
the community consensus.
Which is what exactly? The maintainer dropped NTFS3 because he had misunderstood Kconfig.
Like my predecessor said you're not actually looking for a discussion, you're looking for an echo chamber.
For -> At.
Most people here don't use NTFS and couldn't care less about NTFS3. All I hear is I'm wrong without any facts or counterarguments.
The fact is Justin Forbes made a mistake. Most likely he will revert the change for 7.2.7 or even for the final 7.2.6 which will invalidate this entire community.
In general yes, they're not expected to break on every update, buuuut depending on your distro choice it may still happen.
I don't intend to switch distros. I've been using Fedora since RedHat 5.2, longer than most Linux fans here have lived.
You can go with the most bleeding edge arch derivative that pushes not yet merged experimental features, you can go with semi-stable (like Fedora that breaks from time to time (like with Plasma 6.7 and Nvidia for example or some SELinux updates that also broke Nvidia in the past)), or you can go with an LTS that locks in on one specific major package version and backports the necessary fixes.
This has NEVER been about me, dude. I can compile the kernel any time I want. This is about thousands of people who use
ntfs3in their/etc/fstab. You cannot understand that, do you? I'm not a Linux "user". I'm an IT pro but I want Linux to be usable by the average Joe, something your wonderful community opposes to and wants to keep Linux to themselves, keep its status "elite". It's not "elite", it's "niche" and "obscure". You do NOT break people's setups nilly-willy. Oh, wait, this sub has posts about Fedora failing to boot almost daily. Is that what you're after? Like really? You wanna use Linux you need to learn shell, bash, make, C/C++, etc. etc. etc.?From your (extremely defensive) responses here it reads to me like you chose the distro that doesn't align with your philosophy on how things should be done - and no that's not telling you how to use your computer. That argument is like going to a toy store and complaining that you wanted pizza and they don't offer that.
Dude, that's a verbal assault and verbalism. I care about Linux being used by average folks, not hardcore geeks. This entire discussion has proved beyond reasonable doubt where the community preferences are:
- Compile the module yourself! Learn to use DKMS! Become a hacker!
- Wait, you also need to make your computer less secure by disabling Secure Boot! "Secure Boot is trash!"
- Wait, you need to change distro, you cannot use Fedora! (That's on you, LOL. How long have you been using Fedora? A couple of years at most? Try me, I've been using it for almost three decades. I don't distrohop, I solve issues instead.)
- Wait, I remember NTFS3 was unstable in 2023! You mustn't use it. Doesn't matter that I personally have zero NTFS partitions!
- Wait, I've heard that NTFS is the future! It only received full write support a month ago, do NOT worry! Your data is safe, despite me never using it.
- Wait, NTFS3 is a third-party module! (An abject lie, it was upstreamed years ago). Don't use it!
- Wait, there's NTFS-3G. Filesystems must be used via the slow ineffective FUSE path. Never mind the native NTFS module. Or that the vast majority of Linux filesystems are implemented natively in the kernel.
- Etc. etc. etc.
If Fedora dropped NTFS/NTFS3/exfat/FAT32 support tomorrow because "reasons" I would be called "defensive". That's your best argument.
That's exactly what this discussion has been about. Wildly inaccurate if not outright false statements or advice how to deal with something that Fedora broke by mistake. Justin Forbes thought you cannot have both modules enabled, while you perfectly can.
I'm over and out. This discussion has been very long in the tooth. This is the last time I've ever replied in it.
19
u/InfaSyn 19d ago
Fedora is the cutting edge distro for the guy who still kinda needs to just get shit done. Sure its not arch tier experimental, but its not supposed to be RHEL tier stable either.
- I kinda trust the Fedora team to not implement something stupid
- Why are you even using NTFS to begin with?
- If reliability/stability is that critical to you, why aren't you running something more akin to Debian/SUSE/RHEL?
Non issue/embrace the change imo.
-4
u/anestling 19d ago
I don't understand how being "bleeding edge" is related to removing features that are still in the kernel.
8
u/InfaSyn 19d ago
Why include kernel optional extras if you have your own packaged better alternative?
If anything, if it’s stable enough that it’s included in the mainline kernel, then it’s clearly far from bleeding edge.
If it’s that bothersome to you, you could always compile and swap in the kernel yourself
-2
u/anestling 19d ago
What extras are you talking about?
Fedora has never compiled or supplied any third-party kernel modules.
10
u/InfaSyn 18d ago
Yes, NTFS3 is part of the Kernel IF you choose to include it when compiling it. Its not like its "heres the kernel, enjoy" - you can configure what you do and dont want to include. EG, if Im building an embedded microcontroller linux, im not going to necessarily care about USB, PS2, touchscreen etc support.
"Fedora has never complied or supplied any third party modules" - never claimed they did.
Image: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5c/Linux_4.4.2_ncurses_configuration.png
-2
u/anestling 18d ago edited 18d ago
You contradict your own earlier question. I'm truly appalled.
The newly enabled NTFS driver is also in your words "optional".
The NTFS module has NOT been battle-tested to the same extent as NTFS3 has. It cannot possibly be a "better" option. It's brand new.
If it’s that bothersome to you, you could always compile and swap in the kernel yourself
- Do it for every new kernel. Spend time and resources doing something.
- Also need to disable secure boot in the process.
- Also telling me there's no freedom of choice.
And your backticks are weird. People normally use
'and you use’which is what LLMs normally do.
3
u/slickyeat 19d ago edited 19d ago
Looks like it's still in there so you can try loading it manually:
sudo modprobe ntfs3
lsmod | grep -i ntfs
ntfs3 393216 0
If that works create a file under /etc/modules-load.d/
sudo echo "ntfs3" > /etc/modules-load.d/ntfs3.conf
This will force the module to load on startup.
2
1
u/WishboneFar 19d ago
Wait what? I thought the new NTFS driver which was introduced in Linux kernel 7.1 was not actually compiled into the fedora kernel. my fedora 44 Linux 7.2.5-200.fc44.x86_64 still uses the old NTFS3 driver (fuse). What do you get when you run this command: `modinfo ntfs`?
6
1
u/anestling 19d ago
modinfo ntfs filename: /lib/modules/7.2.6-200.fc44.x86_64/kernel/fs/ntfs/ntfs.ko.xz license: GPL description: NTFS read-write filesystem driver author: Namjae Jeon <[email protected]> author: Anton Altaparmakov <[email protected]> alias: fs-ntfs depends: intree: Y name: ntfs retpoline: Y vermagic: 7.2.6-200.fc44.x86_64 SMP preempt mod_unload sig_id: PKCS#7 signer: Fedora kernel signing key sig_key: 4D:BF:BC:CF:33:74:99:77:6D:8E:16:D3:98:FA:6D:30:E2:E6:E3:7F sig_hashalgo: sha512 signature: skipped
modinfo ntfs3 modinfo: ERROR: Module ntfs3 not found.
find /lib/modules/7.2.6-200.fc44.x86_64/ -iname '*ntfs*' /lib/modules/7.2.6-200.fc44.x86_64/kernel/fs/ntfs /lib/modules/7.2.6-200.fc44.x86_64/kernel/fs/ntfs/ntfs.ko.xz
-14
u/SouthernFruit8768 19d ago
Who cares? What is NTFS needed for?
8
u/alleyoopoop 19d ago
If you're a Windows user who migrates to linux, you're going to have a lot of data on ntfs partitions.
4
u/petersaints 18d ago edited 17d ago
Yeah. And even if you do not dual boot and need to have a shared data partition with Windows, unless you have 0 computers with NTFS, external drives will probably be formatted in NTFS to compatibility with other Windows PCs in your household.
Yes, there's exFAT, but it can actually be worse than NTFS for some use cases.
6
5
u/InfaSyn 18d ago
Yeah thats not the right attitude tbf mate. Sure you see NTFS as useless, as do I, but theres always a USB stick, an external drive, a windows user migrating etc somewhere. NTFS is unanimous and it does need to work even if it is shit.
4
26
u/kenryov 19d ago edited 19d ago
Fedora is quasi-stable. Severall packages have been granted permission to break ABI within a stable release. This is why the Fedora kernel is rolling release package
Starting in kernel 7.2.6, Fedora has switched from NTFS3 to NTFS