ffi Posted February 18, 2009 Report Share Posted February 18, 2009 (edited) The most important difference is that FAT16 can hold files up to 2 GB, and FAT32 up to 4 GB. More than that, symbolic links do not work in either of them- if you want to use them, you are stuk with ext2.But, in the case of a backup medium, none of the above is of any importance- I would go with FAT(32), for the sake of windoze compliance. you could go for ext4 w/o the journal option but that would be quite hard to use even on linux because you would need a very recent kernel; Edited February 18, 2009 by ffi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scarecrow Posted February 18, 2009 Report Share Posted February 18, 2009 It's not just journaling in ext4, it's also barriers (now on by default) which can make a pendrive to behave sluggishly. And of course there's no driver for ext4 under windoze (not even a read-only one), plus that several rather serious bugs were found, which will be fixed upstream in kernel 2.6.29 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ffi Posted February 18, 2009 Report Share Posted February 18, 2009 isn't the barriers option a journaling option? it makes no sense when turning of journaling... http://kernelnewbies.org/Ext4#head-25c0a12...437c38e79f39f63 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tux99 Posted February 19, 2009 Report Share Posted February 19, 2009 (edited) For MS-DOS, but Windows 2000 and higher don't use DOS (even Windows NT also), so this limit may not apply. Normally, FAT16 was good enough for 2GB partitions and no higher, FAT32 if you had higher than this. with Win98 (and I believe with Linux, haven't tried it) you can actually create 4GB FAT16 partitions, which can be read/written by any OS, in XP they don't allow you to CREATE 4GB FAT partitions anymore, but if you have one created by for example Win98, you can still read and write to it. And of course I know that FAT is not a good filesystem ofr large partitions, but it's still the most compatible one, almost any device can read and write to it. If you only care about Linux compatibility then ext2 is the best choice for flash devices. Edited February 19, 2009 by tux99 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianw1974 Posted February 19, 2009 Report Share Posted February 19, 2009 Aye, because Windows 95 and Windows 98 used DOS before getting to the Windows environment ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.