Re: kernel patch support large fat partitions

[H. Peter Anvin]

Followup to:  <[e-mail]>
By author:    Vijay Kumar <[e-mail]>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
> 
> Using 28bit cluster numbers and 65536 cluster size I could go upto 16TB 
> which is lot more than what I wanted. So right now I have no problem with 
> the on-disk format of a fat partition. Nevertheless with hard drives prices 
> going down dramatically it may not be too long before we hit the limit.
> 
> Regards,
> - Vijay
> 

That's Microsoft's problem -- that's a fundamental limit of the format
they defined.  The fact that they defined it in the first place is
part of the problem (the only way you can make a FAT filesystem work
*well* is by loading the entire FAT into memory ahead of time, and
"FAT32" breaks that), instead of creating a more sensible
replacement.

(FWIW, the reason they used to justify FAT32 was "it would be too much
work to make DOS handle NTFS", as if those were the only options...)

	-hpa

-- 
<[e-mail]> at work, <[e-mail]> in private!
"Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."
http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt	<[e-mail]>