lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Oct]   [31]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    Date
    SubjectRe: Linux & FAT32 label
    On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 4:12 AM, Andreas Bombe <aeb@debian.org> wrote:
    > On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 10:49:31PM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
    >> On Thursday 12 October 2017 12:13:11 Karel Zak wrote:
    >> > On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 11:21:13AM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
    >> > > > The best for me is to keep blkid output backwardly compatible as much
    >> > > > as possible :-)
    >> > >
    >> > > Backward compatibility is a good reason. But what with situation when
    >> > > interoperability with other systems (e.g. Windows) does not work as
    >> > > expected?
    >> >
    >> > Then... I'm ready to do the changes to keep interoperability with the
    >> > rest of the universe. It's the same situation as with UDF, you know...
    >>
    >> Apparently situation is not same as with UDF. For UDF we have
    >> specification and basically all known UDF implementation by me were
    >> compatible how to treat label except blkid (which read different think).
    >>
    >> For FAT32 we have 3 different linux implementations (blkid, fatlabel,
    >> mlabel) and every one is slightly different in reading label (see
    >> results sent in previous emails).
    >>
    >> What is first needed to know if implementations are willing to change to
    >> be more or less same. And then decide what we want to change.
    >>
    >> Andreas, as fatlabel maintainer, what do you think about it?
    >>
    >> If you want, I can prepare patches for blkid and fatlabel to mimic
    >> behavior written in proposed solution. But I think it does not make
    >> sense to change just one Linux tool...
    >
    > I was worried that there might be some scripts or programs that expect

    If we really care about such scripts another approach might be to
    introduce a CLI switch to "spec compatible mode" to each tool and
    suggest in documentation to use it.

    There are also variants:
    - spec compatible
    - WinXX compatible
    - DOS compatible
    - etc

    --
    With Best Regards,
    Andy Shevchenko

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2017-10-31 09:36    [W:2.294 / U:0.164 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site