Re: OT?: FAT32(/16?) Question: Max. files in top level
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, Dec 31, 2016 at 02:01:15PM +0100, Nicolas George wrote:
> Le primidi 11 nivôse, an CCXXV, Gene Heskett a écrit :
> > From personal experience decades ago, on a dos3.2 system, this is
> > correct. But I can't testify about the newer, or the now several non-M$
> > versions of dos. I saw an announcement of yet another dos release just a
> > couple weeks back. I assume its getting better
>
> Think a little more about it: it is a limitation of the format, not the
> operating system. If an operating system extends the format, it is no
> longer compatible with the rest of the world, and then there is no
> reason to use FAT at all.
Yes, my hunch was also that it is a limit of the on-disk format (which
is, as you say, set in stone), although I expressed it in a pretty
round-about way, it seems :)
thanks
- -- t
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAlhnzbsACgkQBcgs9XrR2kaerACfWhl4J5oA1wPdA0DTi7cPM4dP
0TUAnROtKgKs9IG5rHWgD6dAk62+wCiF
=5k1I
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: