Re: FAT12 vs FAT16
H. Peter Anvin (hpa@transmeta.com)
23 Aug 1997 00:04:49 GMT
Followup to: <Pine.LNX.3.95.970822175945.130A-100000@chaos.analogic.com>
By author: "Richard B. Johnson" <root@analogic.com>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>
> Not if it's a disk supported by MS-DOS or created using MS-DOS tools.
> MS-DOS format will not (read cannot) make such a disk. Even with its
> media type/size/heads options, it doesn't have the code necessary to
> produce a disk under any other rules because it calculates the
> clusters not you, and it uses the 4085 cluster rule for writing the FAT.
>
> Just because, in principle I can make a disk with one cluster and a 16-bit
> FAT, does not mean that it is a MS-DOS disk. MS-DOS will not understand
> such a disk so no other OS should bother with such a deviation either.
>
I once came across a DOS floppy formatted with FAT16; I think some (OEM?)
version of DOS 2.x or 3.x always formatted FAT16. Surprised the
living daylight out of me...
-hpa
--
PGP: 2047/2A960705 BA 03 D3 2C 14 A8 A8 BD 1E DF FE 69 EE 35 BD 74
See http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/ for web page and full PGP public key
Always looking for a few good BOsFH. ** Linux - the OS of global cooperation
I am Baha'i -- ask me about it or see http://www.bahai.org/