info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Re: exFAT12
8 views
Skip to first unread message
Message has been deleted
Robert Wessel
Dec 1, 2016, 3:29:42 AM12/1/16
to
On Wed, 30 Nov 2016 19:50:05 -0500, "Mike Gonta" <mike...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>A gentle introduction to the exFAT file system in FASM.
>
>http://mikegonta.com/exFAT12
Can you call this something other than exFAT, which is already the
name of a file system for removable devices?
And this is a small lump of largely undocumented assembler, with no
description of purpose, usage or function. As such it really fails to
be an introduction, gentle or otherwise.
wrote:
>A gentle introduction to the exFAT file system in FASM.
>
>http://mikegonta.com/exFAT12
Can you call this something other than exFAT, which is already the
name of a file system for removable devices?
And this is a small lump of largely undocumented assembler, with no
description of purpose, usage or function. As such it really fails to
be an introduction, gentle or otherwise.
JJ
Dec 1, 2016, 5:23:59 AM12/1/16
to
On Wed, 30 Nov 2016 19:50:05 -0500, Mike Gonta wrote:
> A gentle introduction to the exFAT file system in FASM.
>
> http://mikegonta.com/exFAT12
>
> Mike Gonta
> A gentle introduction to the exFAT file system in FASM.
>
> http://mikegonta.com/exFAT12
>
> look and see - many look but few see
>
> http://mikegonta.com
Where's the exFAT12 reader+writer? (not the formatter)
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Robert Wessel
Dec 1, 2016, 7:17:00 AM12/1/16
to
On Thu, 1 Dec 2016 06:10:33 -0500, "Mike Gonta" <mike...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>"Robert Wessel" wrote:
>exFAT.
Oh, this is actually supposed to be MS exFAT. I've never spent much
time looking at the internals of that, so I didn't recognize it. I've
never bothered since the MS format is licensed and proprietary.
See, a little documentation would go a long way.
And if this is really straight exFAT, why call it exFAT12? Or have
you taken some liberties with the format? I believe MS has claimed a
minimum size of 1MB for exFAT, so a 1.44MB floppy should not be an
issue on that basis.
>> And this is a small lump
>
>~220 LOC
>
>> of largely undocumented assembler,
>
>One third of which contains comments and/or descriptive labels.
Which is mostly not documentation.
>> with no description of purpose, usage or function. As such it really
>> fails to
>> be an introduction, gentle or otherwise.
>
>I'll have to read the code to answer that one.
>
>http://mikegonta.com/exFAT12
>https://redd.it/5ftj93
>http://forum.osdev.org/viewtopic.php?f=2&p=268070#p268070
wrote:
>"Robert Wessel" wrote:
>> "Mike Gonta" wrote:
>>
>>>A gentle introduction to the exFAT file system in FASM.
>>>
>>>http://mikegonta.com/exFAT12
>>
>> Can you call this something other than exFAT,
>
>I'm calling it exFAT12.
>>
>>>A gentle introduction to the exFAT file system in FASM.
>>>
>>>http://mikegonta.com/exFAT12
>>
>> Can you call this something other than exFAT,
>
>
>> which is already the name of a file system for removable devices?
>
>Mount the image or transfer it to a removable device and it is recognized as
>> which is already the name of a file system for removable devices?
>
>exFAT.
Oh, this is actually supposed to be MS exFAT. I've never spent much
time looking at the internals of that, so I didn't recognize it. I've
never bothered since the MS format is licensed and proprietary.
See, a little documentation would go a long way.
And if this is really straight exFAT, why call it exFAT12? Or have
you taken some liberties with the format? I believe MS has claimed a
minimum size of 1MB for exFAT, so a 1.44MB floppy should not be an
issue on that basis.
>> And this is a small lump
>
>
>> of largely undocumented assembler,
>
>One third of which contains comments and/or descriptive labels.
Which is mostly not documentation.
>> with no description of purpose, usage or function. As such it really
>> fails to
>> be an introduction, gentle or otherwise.
>
>
>http://mikegonta.com/exFAT12
>https://redd.it/5ftj93
>http://forum.osdev.org/viewtopic.php?f=2&p=268070#p268070
Message has been deleted
Rod Pemberton
Dec 1, 2016, 4:14:43 PM12/1/16
to
On Thu, 1 Dec 2016 08:57:43 -0500
Interesting. Why not? Does it need an 0xAA55 signature?
What about USB stick with an exFAT or exFAT12 floppy image?
What about USB stick with an exFAT or exFAT12 hard disk image?
What about floppy with an exFAT or exFAT12 hard disk image instead
of a floppy image?
Rod Pemberton
"Mike Gonta" <mike...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "Robert Wessel" wrote:
> > I believe MS has claimed a minimum size of 1MB for exFAT, so a
> > 1.44MB floppy should not be an issue on that basis.
>
> Windows will not support exFAT on floppy disks.
> "Robert Wessel" wrote:
> > I believe MS has claimed a minimum size of 1MB for exFAT, so a
> > 1.44MB floppy should not be an issue on that basis.
>
Interesting. Why not? Does it need an 0xAA55 signature?
What about USB stick with an exFAT or exFAT12 floppy image?
What about USB stick with an exFAT or exFAT12 hard disk image?
What about floppy with an exFAT or exFAT12 hard disk image instead
of a floppy image?
Rod Pemberton
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
0 new messages