Prev: slrnpull/scripting question
Next: Makepkg Ratpoison-1.4.0.tgz
From: Richard James on 8 Apr 2008 04:30
On Tue, 08 Apr 2008 04:45:21 +0000, james wrote:

> notbob <notbob(a)nothome.com> wrote in
> news:G1iKj.1191$Ul.904(a)fe097.usenetserver.com:
>
>> I copy a firefox bookmarks.html file to a 4G vfat flash drive and take
>> it to my slack 12 box for viewing/copying. I mount the flash drive no
>> problem. I open the file with firefox. 200+ links have vanished and I
>> have 2-4 links showing, one with 20 lines of the first paragraph of
>> text from the 2nd link web page.
>>
> [snip]
>
> Isn't there a 2Gig limit on the original flash specification? ISTR that
> drives over 2Gig in size take some special driver/hardware/thingy.
> Perhaps you're running into that?

There are two VFAT limits: VFAT cannot store a file over (4GB - 1Byte) in
size. Windows Partitioning tools cannot create a VFAT partition over 32GB
during initial installation.
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/314463/EN-US/

I personally have a portable hard drive 320GB with a 94.9GB VFAT
partition. But I know that I cannot put certain DVD images onto that
partition.

There also is the SD card limitation that Henrik talks about.

Richard James
--
sig fail on line -1
From: marksouth on 8 Apr 2008 07:01
On Tue, 08 Apr 2008 08:23:00 +0200, Helmut Hullen wrote:

> vfat has a 2 GByte limit per partition.

I have a 200 GB external drive on the desk in front of me, formatted as
VFAT, in a single partition.

How did that happen, then?
From: Helmut Hullen on 8 Apr 2008 07:16
Hallo, marksouth,

Du meintest am 08.04.08:

>> vfat has a 2 GByte limit per partition.

> I have a 200 GB external drive on the desk in front of me, formatted
> as VFAT, in a single partition.

> How did that happen, then?

s/partition/file/

Viele Gruesse
Helmut

"Ubuntu" - an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me".

From: notbob on 8 Apr 2008 10:04
On 2008-04-08, Richard James <rjames(a)invalid.com> wrote:

> Test the drive a couple of times and see if any errors crop up.

Yes, I'm going to have to really flog this 4G flash drive and figure out the
problem. I got around it for now by just loading SSHSecureShellClient 3.2.9
on XP and xfer the file via sftp. This worked fine, so I know it's not some
sort of firefox file aberration. The flash drive is still formatted as
vfat, so there should be no problem with the file being xferred from the XP
box to the flash drive. In fact, I viewed the xferred flash drive file from
the XP box and it looked ok. It was not till I mounted it on my slack box
that most of the file seemed to disappear.

This is the only file I've gone XP -> flash drive (FD). All the files I've
put on the FD from slack (SLK -> FD) seem to be fine. Also, the files seems
to be fine from XP -> FD. It's only when viewing the file on the FD from
SLK that I see an error. (hmmm.. didn't try xfer file from FD -> SLK, then
viewing it)

I'll get back on this.

nb

From: james on 8 Apr 2008 10:26
Henrik Carlqvist <Henrik.Carlqvist(a)deadspam.com> wrote in
news:pan.2008.04.08.06.22.11.396966(a)deadspam.com:

> james <mentor(a)arisia.invalid> wrote:
>> Isn't there a 2Gig limit on the original flash specification? ISTR
>> that drives over 2Gig in size take some special
>> driver/hardware/thingy.
>
> Maybe you are thinking about SD cards (secure digital). The first SD
> card specification has a limit of 2 GB. With the SDHC specification
> you can have bigger cards. An SDHC reader/writer is capable to handle
> both SD cards and SDHC cards, but an SD reader/writer is not capable
> to handle SDHC cards. SD and SDHC cards are used in many digital
> cameras.
>
> regards Henrik

I stand corrected. Which is better than standing alone! ;vD If only I'd
googled _before_ posting.

From www.compactflash.org/pr/030302b.pdf:
Las Vegas NV, March 2, 2003 - The CompactFlash Association is
reinforcing that the CompactFlash Specification, since its first release in
1995 continues to support CompactFlash card capacities up to 137GB.
With the introduction of 3GB CompactFlash cards in November 2002,
questions have been raised regarding what is the capacity addressing limit
of CompactFlash cards? The original CompactFlash Specification allowed
addressing for 137GB cards and this is still the current limit.
Technology is available to increase CompactFlash addressing to 1TB
(Terabyte), but is not a priority at this time.
There is another issue that limits the usable size of CompactFlash
cards. Currently the FAT16 file system is used for cards up to 2.2GB. To
use the full capacity of cards over 2.2GB capacity, the FAT32 file system
is necessary.

--
The email address, above, is most certainly munged. Perhaps you
might reply to the newsgroup, instead? Thanks!
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3
Prev: slrnpull/scripting question
Next: Makepkg Ratpoison-1.4.0.tgz