On Thu, Nov 09, 2017 at 10:01:45AM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote: > > > You would have stored LABEL42 in boot sector and no label in root > > > directory. Windows handle this situation as there is no label. > > > > But why should we *care*? > > FAT is Microsoft's filesystem and the only usage of it on Linux is due > to interoperability with different non-Linux systems. So here we should > implement FAT in the similar/same way as other systems. It does not make > sense to implement it differently and specially in non-compatible way. > Because it lost reason what is primary usage of the FAT on Linux. The primary usage of FAT on Linux is for data interchange, primarily with USB sticks. I'm still failing to see how it might "spoil some vast eternal plan"[1] if a USB stick which Windows would show as having no label, blkid/udev showed as having the label "LABEL42"? [1] to quote the song "If I were a rich man" I'm just trying to understand why this specific detail of bit-for-bit compatibility is so important. - Ted -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe util-linux" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
