Subject: Re: file systems for large, removable drives?
To: Rakhesh Sasidharan <rakheshster@gmail.com>
From: Steven M. Bellovin <smb@cs.columbia.edu>
List: netbsd-users
Date: 05/27/2006 10:33:06
On Sat, 27 May 2006 08:22:14 +0400, "Rakhesh Sasidharan"
<rakheshster@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I can clearly use FFS, but that's NetBSD-only; I couldn't share the drive
> > with a Windows box. FAT32 is, as I recall, size-limited; certainly,
> > Windows won't even format a large partition that way. NetBSD can't write
> > NTFS file systems. Are there other options?
>
> I checked up a bit on FAT32 btw. FAT32 is size-limited, but only when
> it comes to *creating* it on Windows 2000/ XP. The real limit of FAT32
> is 2TB, but Windows 2000/ XP doesn't let you create FAT32 partitions
> larger than 32GB.
> (http://www.windowsitpro.com/Article/ArticleID/27253/27253.html)
Ah -- that's a very big help.
>
> The trick is to boot with a Windows 98 disk, and then make FAT32
> partitions larger than 32MB. Windows 2000/ XP can read partitions
> larger than 32GB -- no issues with that.
> (http://www.petri.co.il/install_windows_xp_on_large_fat32_partitions.htm)
Not that I have any Win98 lying around... Hmm -- I wonder if I still have
some DOS boot disks.
>
> Maybe NetBSD's "newfs_msdos" command can make FAT32 partitions larger
> than 32GB? You could try and post your results here perhaps?
Will do.
>
> NetBSD 3.0 has a limit of 128GB on FAT32 partitions though. That has
> been removed for 4.0 and onwards.
> (http://article.gmane.org/gmane.os.netbsd.help/14966)
One of the machines of interest is running 3.0 -- but I've been mulling
upgrading it to get the better USB support.
>
> Hope that helps. Maybe you can go with FAT32 (all OSes seem to have
> support for FAT32 anyways) instead of ext2fs or anything else.
>
That's the best choice, I think -- I don't have to worry about installing
Windows drivers on other folks' machines.
Thanks!
--Steven M. Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb