Re: OT?: FAT32(/16?) Question: Max. files in top level

From	Nicolas George <george@nsup.org>
Newsgroups	linux.debian.user
Subject	Re: OT?: FAT32(/16?) Question: Max. files in top level
Date	2017-01-02 16:30 +0100
Message-ID	<sVcIF-jV-19@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	(3 earlier) <sUoiS-18f-15@gated-at.bofh.it> <sUBg5-VU-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <sUNhf-eY-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <sVbWh-7ZQ-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <sVcIF-jV-15@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] - view raw

Le tridi 13 nivôse, an CCXXV, Jude DaShiell a écrit :
> msdos 6.22 which was fat16 had a limit of 112 files in top level directory.
> Once I tried putting more than that on a floppy disk and couldn't figure why
> no more would fit until I found this out.  I don't know if the limit got
> expanded for fat32 and msdos 7

Will nobody read the darn thread before posting half-wrong statements?
And possibly check their own facts against reliable sources?

The limit does not come from the OS, it is coded in the "superblock" of
the filesystem. It can be configured when creating the filesystem. The
default is indeed sometimes 112.

Also, MS-DOS 6.22 "is" not FAT16, that does not mean anything. FAT12,
FAT16 and FAT32 are three variants of the filesystems with different
compromises between wasted storage per file and wasted storage globally.
The tool that creates the filesystem will normally choose the best one
for a typical use by default. And of course, MS-DOS < 7 did not support
FAT32.

Regards,

-- 
  Nicolas George

Thread

Re: OT?: FAT32(/16?) Question: Max. files in top level Xen <list@xenhideout.nl> - 2016-12-29 07:40 +0100
  Re: OT?: FAT32(/16?) Question: Max. files in top level <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-12-31 10:40 +0100
    Re: OT?: FAT32(/16?) Question: Max. files in top level Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2016-12-31 14:00 +0100
      Re: OT?: FAT32(/16?) Question: Max. files in top level Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2016-12-31 14:10 +0100
        Re: OT?: FAT32(/16?) Question: Max. files in top level Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2016-12-31 15:00 +0100
          Re: OT?: FAT32(/16?) Question: Max. files in top level Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-12-31 15:20 +0100
            Re: OT?: FAT32(/16?) Question: Max. files in top level Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2016-12-31 16:40 +0100
          Re: OT?: FAT32(/16?) Question: Max. files in top level Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2016-12-31 16:40 +0100
        Re: OT?: FAT32(/16?) Question: Max. files in top level <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-12-31 16:30 +0100
    Re: OT?: FAT32(/16?) Question: Max. files in top level David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2017-01-01 00:30 +0100
      Re: OT?: FAT32(/16?) Question: Max. files in top level <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2017-01-01 13:20 +0100
        Re: OT?: FAT32(/16?) Question: Max. files in top level David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2017-01-02 15:40 +0100
          Re: OT?: FAT32(/16?) Question: Max. files in top level Jude DaShiell <jdashiel@panix.com> - 2017-01-02 16:30 +0100
            Re: OT?: FAT32(/16?) Question: Max. files in top level Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2017-01-02 16:30 +0100
              Re: OT?: FAT32(/16?) Question: Max. files in top level rhkramer@gmail.com - 2017-01-02 17:40 +0100
          Re: OT?: FAT32(/16?) Question: Max. files in top level <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2017-01-02 20:50 +0100
    Re: OT?: FAT32(/16?) Question: Max. files in top level Xen <list@xenhideout.nl> - 2017-01-01 12:50 +0100

csiph-web