Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #173640 > unrolled thread

Most compatible way to prepare USB stick

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

Contents

  Most compatible way to prepare USB stick Mark Fletcher <mark27q1@gmail.com> - 2016-10-20 18:20 +0200
    Re: Most compatible way to prepare USB stick Børge Holen <holen.borge@gmail.com> - 2016-10-20 18:40 +0200
    Re: Most compatible way to prepare USB stick Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2016-10-20 19:00 +0200
      Re: Most compatible way to prepare USB stick David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2016-10-20 19:30 +0200
        Re: Most compatible way to prepare USB stick Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-10-20 20:10 +0200
          Re: Most compatible way to prepare USB stick Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2016-10-20 20:50 +0200
            Re: Most compatible way to prepare USB stick Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-10-20 21:10 +0200
              Re: Most compatible way to prepare USB stick Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2016-10-20 21:30 +0200
                Re: Most compatible way to prepare USB stick Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-10-20 21:50 +0200
                  Re: Most compatible way to prepare USB stick Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2016-10-20 23:10 +0200
                    Re: Most compatible way to prepare USB stick Pascal Hambourg <pascal@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2016-10-21 00:30 +0200
          Re: Most compatible way to prepare USB stick David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2016-10-20 23:20 +0200
            Re: Most compatible way to prepare USB stick Mr Smiley <mr_smiley_home@yahoo.com> - 2016-10-21 00:40 +0200
              Re: Most compatible way to prepare USB stick <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-10-21 10:40 +0200
                Re: Most compatible way to prepare USB stick Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2016-10-21 11:00 +0200
                  Re: Most compatible way to prepare USB stick tomas@tuxteam.de - 2016-10-21 11:10 +0200
      Re: Most compatible way to prepare USB stick Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2016-10-20 20:10 +0200
    Re: Most compatible way to prepare USB stick Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-10-20 19:20 +0200
    Re: Most compatible way to prepare USB stick Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2016-10-20 23:00 +0200
      Re: Most compatible way to prepare USB stick Børge Holen <holen.borge@gmail.com> - 2016-10-21 00:50 +0200
      Re: Most compatible way to prepare USB stick Mark Fletcher <mark27q1@gmail.com> - 2016-10-21 15:30 +0200
        Re: Most compatible way to prepare USB stick <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-10-21 15:50 +0200
          Re: Most compatible way to prepare USB stick rlharris@oplink.net - 2016-10-21 17:30 +0200
        Re: Most compatible way to prepare USB stick Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2016-10-21 21:10 +0200
    Re: Most compatible way to prepare USB stick Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2016-10-22 10:50 +0200

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#173640 — Most compatible way to prepare USB stick

Hello the list!

I have gotten myself all turned around and confused on this supposedly 
simple topic, so I'm hoping for a little bit of advice.

I have a USB stick I have previously used as a boot medium for Debian 
installers and live systems. Now I want to wipe it and repurpose it to 
being a generic place to store data for portability between systems. The 
key criterion is that it should be maximally compatible -- I want to be 
able to read and ideally write the stick on Debian, OSX for Mac users 
and Windows (7 and later).

It's a 4GB stick and I am thinking of using all the space in a single 
partition.

Can someone tell me what partition type I should select in cfdisk (or 
what better tool I should use to partition) and what command I should 
use to create a file system on the stick using my Jessie box, that I can 
then write some files to the stick from the Jessie box and expect my 
friend's MacBook to be able to read them? (text files, so if it can read 
the file system we are golden).

I have tried in the past to format USB sticks using Jessie (although 
unfortunately I am coming up blank on the commands I used, it was a 
while ago) and have often found that Mac users get nowhere with the 
result. They plug the stick in and I believe the Mac just doesn't 
acknowledge it is even there (although I haven't witnessed exactly what 
happens, as I don't own a Mac myself, but more than one person has 
chucked a stick back at me saying it was no good [different sticks, so 
the issue is the preparation method not the stick itself])

Thanks and sorry for the simple question! Google didn't turn up much on 
this as most sticks come ready to use and there is less to be said about 
"re-formatting" a stick after it's had an image written to it...

Mark

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#173642

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

On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 6:11 PM, Mark Fletcher <mark27q1@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello the list!
>
> I have gotten myself all turned around and confused on this supposedly
> simple topic, so I'm hoping for a little bit of advice.
>
> I have a USB stick I have previously used as a boot medium for Debian
> installers and live systems. Now I want to wipe it and repurpose it to
> being a generic place to store data for portability between systems. The
> key criterion is that it should be maximally compatible -- I want to be
> able to read and ideally write the stick on Debian, OSX for Mac users
> and Windows (7 and later).
>
> It's a 4GB stick and I am thinking of using all the space in a single
> partition.
>
> Can someone tell me what partition type I should select in cfdisk (or
> what better tool I should use to partition) and what command I should
> use to create a file system on the stick using my Jessie box, that I can
> then write some files to the stick from the Jessie box and expect my
> friend's MacBook to be able to read them? (text files, so if it can read
> the file system we are golden).
>
> I have tried in the past to format USB sticks using Jessie (although
> unfortunately I am coming up blank on the commands I used, it was a
> while ago) and have often found that Mac users get nowhere with the
> result. They plug the stick in and I believe the Mac just doesn't
> acknowledge it is even there (although I haven't witnessed exactly what
> happens, as I don't own a Mac myself, but more than one person has
> chucked a stick back at me saying it was no good [different sticks, so
> the issue is the preparation method not the stick itself])
>
> Thanks and sorry for the simple question! Google didn't turn up much on
> this as most sticks come ready to use and there is less to be said about
> "re-formatting" a stick after it's had an image written to it...
>
> Mark
>
>
fdisk cfdisk parted, all works... Does not matter what you creat as long as
you just make the partitions the sizes you want.
https://www.google.no/search?q=mkfs
dd if=/dev/null of=device of usbdisk if f*** doesn't wanna play nice.
I like to use exfat for my memory sticks. We have a work environment witch
includes mac linuxes and windows.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#173643

On Fri, 21 Oct 2016 01:11:10 +0900
Mark Fletcher <mark27q1@gmail.com> wrote:


> 
> Thanks and sorry for the simple question! Google didn't turn up much
> on this as most sticks come ready to use and there is less to be said
> about "re-formatting" a stick after it's had an image written to it...
> 
>
Simple but not trivial. Since you have used the phrase 'most
compatible' in the subject line, I'm afraid I must recommend using
Windows. Windows is by far the fussiest about disc formats, and it
really can't argue if has done the job itself.

At least two of the sticks I use regularly cause Win8 to complain that
there is a problem with them, although it seems to read and write them
OK, and to be incapable of delivering on its offer to 'fix' them.

-- 
Joe

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#173645

On 10/20/2016 09:49 AM, Joe wrote:
> Simple but not trivial. Since you have used the phrase 'most
> compatible' in the subject line, I'm afraid I must recommend using
> Windows.

+1

Use Linux 'dd' to wipe the first megabyte, plug the USB flash drive into
a Windows machine, and use Windows to format it.


David

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#173649

On Thu 20 Oct 2016 at 10:21:59 -0700, David Christensen wrote:

> On 10/20/2016 09:49 AM, Joe wrote:
> > Simple but not trivial. Since you have used the phrase 'most
> > compatible' in the subject line, I'm afraid I must recommend using
> > Windows.
> 
> +1
> 
> Use Linux 'dd' to wipe the first megabyte, plug the USB flash drive into
> a Windows machine, and use Windows to format it.

Wiping the first megabyte is good advice - it will remove any trace
of previously installed Debian isohybrid images. But Windows machines
aren't thick on the ground here. Can I use a Linux machine? Will I
regret it if I do?

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#173654

On Thu, 20 Oct 2016 19:04:12 +0100
Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> wrote:

> On Thu 20 Oct 2016 at 10:21:59 -0700, David Christensen wrote:
> 
> > On 10/20/2016 09:49 AM, Joe wrote:  
> > > Simple but not trivial. Since you have used the phrase 'most
> > > compatible' in the subject line, I'm afraid I must recommend using
> > > Windows.  
> > 
> > +1
> > 
> > Use Linux 'dd' to wipe the first megabyte, plug the USB flash drive
> > into a Windows machine, and use Windows to format it.  
> 
> Wiping the first megabyte is good advice - it will remove any trace
> of previously installed Debian isohybrid images. But Windows machines
> aren't thick on the ground here. Can I use a Linux machine? Will I
> regret it if I do?
> 

Probably not, but the OP did say 'most compatible'. I've had most
trouble with pre-formatted sticks, often partitionless, so I don't
think twice about formatting new ones now.

-- 
Joe

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#173655

On Thu 20 Oct 2016 at 19:42:51 +0100, Joe wrote:

> On Thu, 20 Oct 2016 19:04:12 +0100
> Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> wrote:
> 
> > On Thu 20 Oct 2016 at 10:21:59 -0700, David Christensen wrote:
> > 
> > > On 10/20/2016 09:49 AM, Joe wrote:  
> > > > Simple but not trivial. Since you have used the phrase 'most
> > > > compatible' in the subject line, I'm afraid I must recommend using
> > > > Windows.  
> > > 
> > > +1
> > > 
> > > Use Linux 'dd' to wipe the first megabyte, plug the USB flash drive
> > > into a Windows machine, and use Windows to format it.  
> > 
> > Wiping the first megabyte is good advice - it will remove any trace
> > of previously installed Debian isohybrid images. But Windows machines
> > aren't thick on the ground here. Can I use a Linux machine? Will I
> > regret it if I do?
> > 
> 
> Probably not, but the OP did say 'most compatible'. I've had most
> trouble with pre-formatted sticks, often partitionless, so I don't
> think twice about formatting new ones now.

As the OP said

  The key criterion is that it should be maximally compatible

If a reformatted USB stick on Debian isn't "maximally compatible" I
could understand the steering towards using Windows for the operation.
I don't have Windows but many do. They are the ones to test and report.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#173658

On Thu, 20 Oct 2016 20:03:01 +0100
Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> wrote:

> On Thu 20 Oct 2016 at 19:42:51 +0100, Joe wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, 20 Oct 2016 19:04:12 +0100
> > Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> wrote:
> >   
> > > On Thu 20 Oct 2016 at 10:21:59 -0700, David Christensen wrote:
> > >   
> > > > On 10/20/2016 09:49 AM, Joe wrote:    
> > > > > Simple but not trivial. Since you have used the phrase 'most
> > > > > compatible' in the subject line, I'm afraid I must recommend
> > > > > using Windows.    
> > > > 
> > > > +1
> > > > 
> > > > Use Linux 'dd' to wipe the first megabyte, plug the USB flash
> > > > drive into a Windows machine, and use Windows to format it.    
> > > 
> > > Wiping the first megabyte is good advice - it will remove any
> > > trace of previously installed Debian isohybrid images. But
> > > Windows machines aren't thick on the ground here. Can I use a
> > > Linux machine? Will I regret it if I do?
> > >   
> > 
> > Probably not, but the OP did say 'most compatible'. I've had most
> > trouble with pre-formatted sticks, often partitionless, so I don't
> > think twice about formatting new ones now.  
> 
> As the OP said
> 
>   The key criterion is that it should be maximally compatible
> 
> If a reformatted USB stick on Debian isn't "maximally compatible" I
> could understand the steering towards using Windows for the operation.
> I don't have Windows but many do. They are the ones to test and
> report.
> 

And I do. My server, home workstation and netbook run Debian, my
working laptop and my wife's workstation run Windows, as do all of my
clients. My experience is that Windows is sometimes fussy about
Linux-formatted media, hence my advice.

-- 
Joe

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#173659

On Thu 20 Oct 2016 at 20:25:04 +0100, Joe wrote:

> On Thu, 20 Oct 2016 20:03:01 +0100
> Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> wrote:
> 
> > If a reformatted USB stick on Debian isn't "maximally compatible" I
> > could understand the steering towards using Windows for the operation.
> > I don't have Windows but many do. They are the ones to test and
> > report.
> 
> And I do. My server, home workstation and netbook run Debian, my
> working laptop and my wife's workstation run Windows, as do all of my
> clients. My experience is that Windows is sometimes fussy about
> Linux-formatted media, hence my advice.

I acknowledge your experience and expertise and recognise its relevance
to the OP's question. Maybe Debian cannot ever get it right when it
comes to this interworking with other filesystems.

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#173663

On Thu, 20 Oct 2016 20:46:53 +0100
Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> wrote:

> On Thu 20 Oct 2016 at 20:25:04 +0100, Joe wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, 20 Oct 2016 20:03:01 +0100
> > Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> wrote:
> >   
> > > If a reformatted USB stick on Debian isn't "maximally compatible"
> > > I could understand the steering towards using Windows for the
> > > operation. I don't have Windows but many do. They are the ones to
> > > test and report.  
> > 
> > And I do. My server, home workstation and netbook run Debian, my
> > working laptop and my wife's workstation run Windows, as do all of
> > my clients. My experience is that Windows is sometimes fussy about
> > Linux-formatted media, hence my advice.  
> 
> I acknowledge your experience and expertise and recognise its
> relevance to the OP's question. Maybe Debian cannot ever get it right
> when it comes to this interworking with other filesystems.
> 

Hardly just Debian. Playing catch-up with unpublished specifications by
means of reverse engineering is never going to reach 100% perfection,
and Microsoft is unlikely to ever acknowledge the existence of
not-invented-here filesystems. As I recall, it was some years before
the Linux NTFS implementation dropped its advice to use it read-only.

-- 
Joe

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#173667

Le 20/10/2016 à 23:01, Joe a écrit :
>
> and Microsoft is unlikely to ever acknowledge the existence of
> not-invented-here filesystems.

They already did : UDF. No, it is not limited to optical discs.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#173664

On 10/20/2016 11:04 AM, Brian wrote:
> Wiping the first megabyte is good advice - it will remove any trace 
> of previously installed Debian isohybrid images. But Windows machines
> aren't thick on the ground here. Can I use a Linux machine? Will I
> regret it if I do?

On 10/20/2016 11:07 AM, Nicolas George wrote:
> I have not checked accurately, but nowadays letting Windows chose the
> format will possibly yield exFAT, which is very low in terms of 
> compatibility, starting with Linux itself (FUSE filesystems are not 
> part of Linux).

I have a backup/ imaging/ workbench/ experiment computer with 3.5" and
2.5" HDD/ SSD mobile racks and trayless racks.  I keep a working Windows
XP image on a HDD for just these occasions.  I believe Windows NT does
NTFS and FAT 12/16/32 (?).  I typically use NTFS, as Debian has
supported NTFS read/ write for several years now and because NTFS is
needed by Norton Ghost 2003 for long file names (one of my favorite
tools from the XP days).


My digital camera (Canon G9X) has a 64 GB SDXC card (SanDisk
SDSDXPA-064G-X46), which is factory-formatted; I believe it is exFAT.  I
have tried connecting the camera to Wheezy over a USB cable more than
once, but have never succeeded at accessing files.  The work-around is
to take the flash card out and use an USB flash card reader (IOGEAR
GFR209).  Sometimes I have similar issues with Android phones, with the
same work-around.  I've installed several packages along the way,
probably more that I need:

    exfat-fuse
    exfat-utils
    gvfs
    gvfs-backends
    jmtpfs


Apple devices are even harder.  The work-around has been to have my son
connect them to his MacBook Pro and copy the files to the file server.


David


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_system

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_Allocation_Table

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NTFS

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ExFAT

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#173668

I have a satellite receiver that records to an external USB device which 
has to be formatted to Fat32. Every few weeks it says it can't find a 
compatible fat32 device. If  I connect the usb device (either usb stick 
or external hard disk) to a windows machine and copy any file to the 
same folder, so it creates a xxxxxcopy1.xxx and then delete that same 
file. Reconnecting the device to the receiver it sees the device as a 
valid fat32 and everybody’s happy.

If i do the same on my debian system, create say using touch and then 
delete, the receiver still refuses to see it. Only a windows machine can 
get it working again.

The closest I’ve come to an answer is that Linux can't fully use the 
windows method of long file names properly.

So there is a major difference in the way Linux and windows handle file 
naming. The file names look the same on both Linux and windows, but 
behind the scenes they are not.

I stopped using the receiver in the end, my mate up the road with a 
windows lappy got fed up of me knocking him up in the early hours :(

:o)


On 20/10/16 22:12, David Christensen wrote:
> On 10/20/2016 11:04 AM, Brian wrote:
>> Wiping the first megabyte is good advice - it will remove any trace
>> of previously installed Debian isohybrid images. But Windows machines
>> aren't thick on the ground here. Can I use a Linux machine? Will I
>> regret it if I do?
> On 10/20/2016 11:07 AM, Nicolas George wrote:
>> I have not checked accurately, but nowadays letting Windows chose the
>> format will possibly yield exFAT, which is very low in terms of
>> compatibility, starting with Linux itself (FUSE filesystems are not
>> part of Linux).
> I have a backup/ imaging/ workbench/ experiment computer with 3.5" and
> 2.5" HDD/ SSD mobile racks and trayless racks.  I keep a working Windows
> XP image on a HDD for just these occasions.  I believe Windows NT does
> NTFS and FAT 12/16/32 (?).  I typically use NTFS, as Debian has
> supported NTFS read/ write for several years now and because NTFS is
> needed by Norton Ghost 2003 for long file names (one of my favorite
> tools from the XP days).
>
>
> My digital camera (Canon G9X) has a 64 GB SDXC card (SanDisk
> SDSDXPA-064G-X46), which is factory-formatted; I believe it is exFAT.  I
> have tried connecting the camera to Wheezy over a USB cable more than
> once, but have never succeeded at accessing files.  The work-around is
> to take the flash card out and use an USB flash card reader (IOGEAR
> GFR209).  Sometimes I have similar issues with Android phones, with the
> same work-around.  I've installed several packages along the way,
> probably more that I need:
>
>      exfat-fuse
>      exfat-utils
>      gvfs
>      gvfs-backends
>      jmtpfs
>
>
> Apple devices are even harder.  The work-around has been to have my son
> connect them to his MacBook Pro and copy the files to the file server.
>
>
> David
>
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_system
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_Allocation_Table
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NTFS
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ExFAT
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#173679

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 11:36:57PM +0100, Mr Smiley wrote:
> I have a satellite receiver that records to an external USB device
> which has to be formatted to Fat32. Every few weeks it says it can't
> find a compatible fat32 device. If  I connect the usb device (either
> usb stick or external hard disk) to a windows machine and copy any
> file to the same folder, so it creates a xxxxxcopy1.xxx and then
> delete that same file. Reconnecting the device to the receiver it
> sees the device as a valid fat32 and everybody’s happy.
> 
> If i do the same on my debian system, create say using touch and
> then delete, the receiver still refuses to see it. Only a windows
> machine can get it working again.
> 
> The closest I’ve come to an answer is that Linux can't fully use the
> windows method of long file names properly.

Another possible explanation is that something is corrupting the
file system. Since FAT (especially on removable devices) is very
prone to corruption (people pull out the medium all the time without
giving the file system drivers a chance to flush their buffers),
Windows has evolved a strategy to do a file system repair behind
the scenes whenever things get modified.

That means that from time to time a file or three might disappear
silently, but Windows users are a hardy species, capable of taking
a fair amount of abuse.

Have you ever, under Linux, tried fsck.vfat?

> So there is a major difference in the way Linux and windows handle
> file naming. The file names look the same on both Linux and windows,
> but behind the scenes they are not.

You'd need more evidence to convince me of that. Among other things,
fat (and even the Rube-Goldbergian vfat) are stable since long, and
(by current standards) relatively simple.

regards
- -- tomás
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAlgJ06gACgkQBcgs9XrR2kbBXwCfUUysF7qXEtRRrDzmqJpHas14
iWEAn3P2RL2fx4YGQNiFaksN0cdZ+1I9
=j/Sk
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#173680

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

Le decadi 30 vendémiaire, an CCXXV, tomas@tuxteam.de a écrit :
> > So there is a major difference in the way Linux and windows handle
> > file naming. The file names look the same on both Linux and windows,
> > but behind the scenes they are not.
> You'd need more evidence to convince me of that. Among other things,
> fat (and even the Rube-Goldbergian vfat) are stable since long, and
> (by current standards) relatively simple.

There is a major difference in filenames between Linux and Windows, though.

For Linux, a filename is an arbitrary sequence of octets, with only two
values forbidden: 0x00 used as a string terminator, and 0x2F, used a
directory separator. Translating these sequence into printable string is
entirely up to the applications, with most applications having converged to
UTF-8 nowadays.

For Windows, a filename is a sequence of Unicode code points, encoded in
various ways: sometimes as UTF-16, sometimes as a legacy 8-bits encoding,
sometimes as UTF-8 masquerading as a legacy 8-bits encoding. On the sectors
of a VFAT device, I think it is UTF-16.

Since VFAT is a Windows filesystem, Linux has to adapt to handle it, this is
the role of the various nls_* kernel modules.

Regards,

-- 
  Nicolas George

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#173681

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 10:51:54AM +0200, Nicolas George wrote:
> Le decadi 30 vendémiaire, an CCXXV, tomas@tuxteam.de a écrit :
> > > So there is a major difference in the way Linux and windows handle
> > > file naming. The file names look the same on both Linux and windows,
> > > but behind the scenes they are not.
> > You'd need more evidence to convince me of that. Among other things,
> > fat (and even the Rube-Goldbergian vfat) are stable since long, and
> > (by current standards) relatively simple.
> 
> There is a major difference in filenames between Linux and Windows, though.
> 
> For Linux, a filename is an arbitrary sequence of octets, with only two
> values forbidden: 0x00 used as a string terminator, and 0x2F, used a
> directory separator. Translating these sequence into printable string is
> entirely up to the applications, with most applications having converged to
> UTF-8 nowadays.
> 
> For Windows, a filename is a sequence of Unicode code points, encoded in
> various ways: sometimes as UTF-16, sometimes as a legacy 8-bits encoding,
> sometimes as UTF-8 masquerading as a legacy 8-bits encoding. On the sectors
> of a VFAT device, I think it is UTF-16.
> 
> Since VFAT is a Windows filesystem, Linux has to adapt to handle it, this is
> the role of the various nls_* kernel modules.

This is correct. There's even more to it -- Windows is kinda case-insensitive
(kinda: it can write upper and lower case, but it doesn't differentiate,
a good way to inadvertently overwrite a file :)

But all of this doesn't make a file system corrupt. It can produce funny
file names, though.

regards
- -- t
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAlgJ2zwACgkQBcgs9XrR2kYjrgCfcjTRf547SCa+LRg2IL38VYf5
soQAnAzyywsSYJrXMqnfsZ2p3iXfBQRF
=Fs4n
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#173648

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

Le nonidi 29 vendémiaire, an CCXXV, Joe a écrit :
> Simple but not trivial. Since you have used the phrase 'most
> compatible' in the subject line, I'm afraid I must recommend using
> Windows. Windows is by far the fussiest about disc formats, and it
> really can't argue if has done the job itself.

I have not checked accurately, but nowadays letting Windows chose the format
will possibly yield exFAT, which is very low in terms of compatibility,
starting with Linux itself (FUSE filesystems are not part of Linux).

Regards,

-- 
  Nicolas George

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#173644

On Fri 21 Oct 2016 at 01:11:10 +0900, Mark Fletcher wrote:

> Can someone tell me what partition type I should select in cfdisk (or 
> what better tool I should use to partition) and what command I should 
> use to create a file system on the stick using my Jessie box, that I can 
> then write some files to the stick from the Jessie box and expect my 
> friend's MacBook to be able to read them? (text files, so if it can read 
> the file system we are golden).

I have had no problem with FAT16 and 'mkfs.vfat <partition>' on Linux
systems. From a little reading the Macs seem have a native utility
which prefers FAT32, so this could be the better option. Whatever, you
choose you will need to test as widely as you can.

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#173662

> It's a 4GB stick and I am thinking of using all the space in a single 
> partition.

Assuming the USB stick is at /dev/sdb I'd do:

    % fdisk /dev/sdb
    o
    n RET RET RET RET
    w
    q
    % mkfs.vfat /dev/sdb1

This has always worked well for me, for Windows and Mac OS X.
[ IIUC using vfat for larger devices can occasionally lead to
  incompatibilities, but for 4GB there's no such problem.  ]


-- Stefan

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#173669

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

Same here. Never had problems making disks in linux that I could use
anywhere else. Did not think anyone could see it as a problem. Only extra
option i sometimes add is dd to be able to remove usb install disks for deb

On 20 Oct 2016 22:58, "Stefan Monnier" <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> wrote:

> > It's a 4GB stick and I am thinking of using all the space in a single
> > partition.
>
> Assuming the USB stick is at /dev/sdb I'd do:
>
>     % fdisk /dev/sdb
>     o
>     n RET RET RET RET
>     w
>     q
>     % mkfs.vfat /dev/sdb1
>
> This has always worked well for me, for Windows and Mac OS X.
> [ IIUC using vfat for larger devices can occasionally lead to
>   incompatibilities, but for 4GB there's no such problem.  ]
>
>
> -- Stefan
>
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web