SuSE 10.2 & FAT32?

[surv1v0r]

Does SuSE 10.2 support reading AND writing to the Windows FAT32 file system?

I know that it doesn't support writing to NTFS but does work with FAT16 - I haven't tried FAT32.

Many thanks for any practical experience.

[aliov]

Yes you can read and write in fat32 without any problem , the name of the Fat32 filesystem under linux is called vfat and it's completely supported by the kernel.


Regards.

[Juan Pablo]

NTFS is also supported using ntfs-3g and fuse, it's fairly easy to install

[devils casper]

Does SuSE 10.2 support reading AND writing to the Windows FAT32 file system?

I know that it doesn't support writing to NTFS but does work with FAT16 - I haven't tried FAT32.

SuSe supports read/write access on FAT32 partition out of box and installer mounts all those partition with correct parameters automatically.

[surv1v0r]

Many thanks for the feedback.

[surv1v0r]

In order to try and achieve some sort of compatibility, I decided to go for FAT32 because I was under the impression that a FAT32 partition could be up to 2Tb Link 1.

In point of fact, under Windows 2000, you can't create a FAT32 partition larger than 32Gb:

Maximum volume size = 32 GB (This is due to the Windows 2000 format utility. The maximum volume size that Windows 98 can create is 127.53 GB) Link 2

When I tried to create a 33Gb partition under W2K I got an error MsgBox reading "Volume size is too big"

So, it's back to Windows '98 SE then

[surv1v0r]

I am having MAJOR problems using an external USB disk as a backup device with SuSE 10.2. Basically, USB seems to be incredibly slow.

On a 320GB LaCie external hard disk drive, I formatted two partitions, each of about 10GB - one as ext3 and the other as FAT32.

Copying 20 files totalling just over 4,027 million bytes (3.75GB) took 4 minutes 9 seconds to the FAT32 partition under Windows 2000 and 42 minutes 7 seconds to the ext3 partition under SuSE 10.2.

Can anyone offer any suggestions as to why data transfer to an external disk is so much slower under SuSE 10.2 than under Windows 2000 and whether I can do anything about it?

[Juan Pablo]

Check the output of this

hdparm /dev/<usb harddrive>

Replace <usb harddrive> with the proper device node

[seavashr]

check SUSE® Linux Enterprise 10: File System Support FAQ for SUSE® Linux Enterprise 10: File System Support FAQ


Why has Novell decided to make ext3 the default file system in SUSE Linux Enterprise 11 instead of remaining with ReiserFS or choosing OCFS2?

This change is almost completely in response to recent customer demand. Novell is seeing increasing numbers of customers who prefer ext3 to ReiserFS, and our choice of default for SUSE Linux Enterprise 11 reflects this. Today, ext3 and ReiserFS v3 are mostly on par: ext3 has very recently gained some scalability enhancements (h-trees) and online expansion support (in SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 10). Furthermore, ext3 now features more than three years of journaling hardening, which makes it competitive with ReiserFS v3. OCFS2 is a parallel cluster file system designed for specific workloads, but it is unlikely that it will have root/boot support by SUSE Linux Enterprise 11. Finally, Novell is following the development of ext4, and expects it to become a solid nextgeneration enterprise file system.
Is Novell abandoning ReiserFS?

Not at all. Novell continues to support and improve ReiserFS v3. It is also included in mainline kernel distributions and will continue to receive enterprise support in future SUSE Linux Enterprise distributions. Customers who deploy SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 9 or SUSE Linux Enterprise 10—and determine that ReiserFS is best for their companies’ applications or service use cases—should use ReiserFS. Novell has always recommended using the best file system for the application or service. File systems seem to “live forever,” so ReiserFS v3 will be supported for the foreseeable future in SUSE Linux Enterprise distributions.
Why did SUSE Linux Enterprise use ReiserFS in the first place?

About seven years ago, SUSE needed an enterprise scalable journaled file system, and ReiserFS was the only one available. After arranging for support with NameSys (the Reiser development team) and building internal expertise, ReiserFS was the obvious choice. At that time, ext3 did not yet exist; it did not appear until about four years later. In addition, ext3 has only recently (within the last year) gained key enterprise-level features such as online expansion and scalability, which ReiserFS v3 has had for years.
After ReiserFS v4 is accepted in the mainline kernel, will Novell switch back to supporting it in future versions of SUSE Linux Enterprise?

While it is possible that Novell will support ReiserFS v4 in future enterprise deployments (when it is stable, enterprise worthy and included in the mainline kernel), it is unlikely that it will become the default installation choice.
Will Novell support ext4 in future versions of SUSE Linux Enterprise?

Novell anticipates that future versions of SUSE Linux Enterprise will support ext4, but only after it is accepted in the mainline kernel and is deemed enterprise worthy and stable. There are compatibility questions that still need to be resolved between ext3 and ext4 (for example, 48-bit block numbers), which will dictate when and how Novell supports this new file system.
Is this change in the default file system going to appear in the future service packs of SUSE Linux Enterprise 10?

No. Novell doesn't make default configuration changes in service packs. Doing so would cause too much disruption to customer deployments of SUSE Linux Enterprise 10.
There are other file systems included in SUSE Linux Enterprise 10 besides ReiserFS, ext3, XFS and OCFS2. Are they supported?

The other file systems are included for convenience and are not directly supported by Novell. Other vendors may offer support for these systems (for example, IBM for the JFS file system). In addition, there are third-party addon file systems (such as PolyServe or Symantec–Veritas), which are supported by their respective vendors on SUSE Linux Enterprise.