Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

exFAT in the Linux kernel

cloudblogs.microsoft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 280 posts

Re: exFAT in the Linux kernel

#201

Post by sascha_sl »

derefr wrote: post #62
elipsey wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, dumb question. :) I guess I never noticed a problem because either I mostly use ext3/4, or I am so used to using legally dubious drivers that I forgot they were there. I mean, who ever gives you a FAT formatted disk? I don't have floppy drive anyway :p

Linux itself creates a FAT partition for /boot, because the UEFI standard supports loading from FAT. As well, if you ever look at a live-CD (like the installers for most modern Linux distros are), it will usually be using SYSLINUX, which limits itself to 8.3 filenames, for various good reasons to do with floppies, PXE, and ISO9660. Mount an Ubuntu CD in Windows and you'll see them.

EFI System and /boot are often the same partition, but they don't have to be, GRUB can boot a kernel and initramfs off most common linux filesystems (and less common ones like xfs, hfs and reiser), it can even decrypt a LUKS partition.

Re: exFAT in the Linux kernel

#202

Post by rswail »

immigrantsheep wrote: post #134
msftlvslicnsing wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

VSCode, exFat, and .Net core are not enormous. Their revenue streams are enormous and remain as close to their chest as ever.

So they should start losing money? Should Google? Should Apple? I don't get this argument. And .Net Core being open source is enormous if you use it.

The system I just implemented is using .Net Core on Ubuntu on AWS/VMWare and is happily processing lots of transit trips a day. Licensing costs are $0.

.Net Core brings MS's equivalent to Java to Linux and enables the use of a better language set (C#/F#) and allows for a relatively seamless development experience.

What's not to like?

Re: exFAT in the Linux kernel

#203

Post by rickycook »

robocat wrote: post #79
Gibbon1 wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference is Microsoft sells and licenses products to help customers with real needs. Google's customers are all about dark marketing.

Windows Home is to Microsoft, as Chrome is to Google. Microsoft hasn't charged consumers for upgrades to Windows for years - and surely that is because they expect to profit from advertising. The same can pretty much be said for Windows Pro and small businesses. Why is there no subscription to Windows? Why can't I pay to get 3 more years of security fixes for Windows 7 however an enterprise can?

advertising yes, but also why they are kind of lax on piracy: the real money is in corporate, so you have to keep people using your ecosystem at home so that’s what they want to use at work

Re: exFAT in the Linux kernel

#204

Post by Piskvorrr »

derefr wrote: post #62
elipsey wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, dumb question. :) I guess I never noticed a problem because either I mostly use ext3/4, or I am so used to using legally dubious drivers that I forgot they were there. I mean, who ever gives you a FAT formatted disk? I don't have floppy drive anyway :p

Linux itself creates a FAT partition for /boot, because the UEFI standard supports loading from FAT. As well, if you ever look at a live-CD (like the installers for most modern Linux distros are), it will usually be using SYSLINUX, which limits itself to 8.3 filenames, for various good reasons to do with floppies, PXE, and ISO9660. Mount an Ubuntu CD in Windows and you'll see them.

A liveusb using FAT+SYSLINUX/Grub4DOS/whatever has another really good reason: it's readable (and probably writable) from anywhere.

I.e. my EDC flash disk has FAT32-formatted first partition, yet is bootable. This is surprisingly versatile.

Re: exFAT in the Linux kernel

#205

Post by [deleted] »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #44
elipsey wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, dumb question. :) I guess I never noticed a problem because either I mostly use ext3/4, or I am so used to using legally dubious drivers that I forgot they were there. I mean, who ever gives you a FAT formatted disk? I don't have floppy drive anyway :p

Most flash drives and SD cards are still FAT formatted by default.

[deleted]

Re: exFAT in the Linux kernel

#206

Post by gurkendoktor »

viraptor wrote: post #126
throwaway_391 wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would recommend against using Office 365 web ui for word/excel etc, I'd also recommend avoiding the MacOS Office build for the same reason: They're both buggy as hell, the type of bugs that will make your document render in unintended ways when somebody opens it on the other side. At some point, Word for Mac decided to remove whitespace between words on my resume - I couldn't see them and generally exported to PDF,…

> I'd also recommend avoiding the MacOS Office build for the same reason I never understood why they made it a effectively a different product. (Once you go past the trivial interaction) Different features, different behaviours, different problems. Why is excel for Mac not the same engine with a different UI?

I actually thought that this is what they were doing:

https://www.zdnet.com/article/how-microsoft-is-taking-on-the...

Re: exFAT in the Linux kernel

#207

Post by rswail »

dis-sys wrote: post #187

I will believe Microsoft loves Linux when they decide to drop the development of their buggy NT kernel and starts to build windows on top of the mainline Linux kernel. Everything else is just cheap marketing.

"buggy NT kernel" is a stretch. There's nothing particularly wrong about the NT kernel in its design or implementation, any more than other kernels.

MS don't have to drop Windows to support Linux. They can walk and chew gum at the same time.

Re: exFAT in the Linux kernel

#208

Post by Piskvorrr »

azinman2 wrote: post #49
elipsey wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, dumb question. :) I guess I never noticed a problem because either I mostly use ext3/4, or I am so used to using legally dubious drivers that I forgot they were there. I mean, who ever gives you a FAT formatted disk? I don't have floppy drive anyway :p

USB flash disks are almost always exfat formatted.

[citation-needed]

Most USB flash disks I've seen (and I've seen many) are even nowadays mostly FAT32. "Portable drives" aka USB-to-SATA are shipped preformatted to NTFS, and only with the advent of SDXC did preformatted exFAT start to appear.

(It has to do with driver support, I would guess - exFAT works in Win7+, but as long as the world runs on WinXP kiosks (ugh), vendors go with the lowest common denominator. Note that a flash disk will go places - what's your car entertainment system running? Linux? Android? Windows CE? Anfient Embedded Monftrofity? Will it support exFAT? Unlikely.)

Re: exFAT in the Linux kernel

#209

Post by benbristow »

GordonS wrote: post #70
benbristow wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NTFS-3g is pretty good and support on Linux is definitely a lot better than it used to be. Still, official (or officially supported/documented) support would be really nice. Honestly I hope even Windows abandons NTFS soon. It's the worst part of using Windows. e.g. Try and develop any Node project on Windows and it's painful - takes literally minutes to delete the node_modules folder whereas on Linux/Mac it takes sec…

On the other side, file ACLs in NTFS are way more powerful than the Linux owner-group-world model.

Linux NTFS support is useful for that. It doesn't support them so you can just access/nuke any files you want through it even if Windows won't let you.

Re: exFAT in the Linux kernel

#210

Post by vetinari »

RaleyField wrote: post #151
chme wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Offering a cloud service to a linux user is like tempting a vegetarian with meat. Linux users often choose Linux because they want to be in control of their data and devices, cloud services are about giving control of that away to companies.

> want to be in control of their data and devices, The other day there was a thread on HN about which laptop is great for Linux. Tons of people recommended Lenovo, a guy from Redhat said it's even the brand that's used internally and I got a little depressed and smh. Nobody mentioned superfish. Those glorious days of Linux are gone.

Redhat internally uses Thinkpads.

Superfish was on Ideapads, and it was bundled Windows software.

While both are by Lenovo, they are separate product lines.

Post reply on HN