From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753735AbdKIJBu (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Nov 2017 04:01:50 -0500 Received: from mail-wr0-f175.google.com ([209.85.128.175]:46461 "EHLO mail-wr0-f175.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752961AbdKIJBs (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Nov 2017 04:01:48 -0500 X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABhQp+TWB8fYUuztqKiv6FLLIm93Guti7aciuJnz56Y+s7ZmISpUIoLIL1XmnMSo3z/uK+lQzO0qfQ== Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2017 10:01:45 +0100 From: Pali =?utf-8?B?Um9ow6Fy?= To: "Theodore Ts'o" , Andy Shevchenko , Andreas Bombe , Karel Zak , util-linux@vger.kernel.org, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Andrius =?utf-8?B?xaB0aWtvbmFz?= , Curtis Gedak , pavel@ucw.cz Subject: Re: Linux & FAT32 label Message-ID: <20171109090145.lffuluwm3sxanfzu@pali> References: <20171012101311.zfvg6edfvszlujom@ws.net.home> <20171012204931.tfd2bhmwu5b6rbpz@pali> <20171016011243.zurh5jhb2y6mczx7@amos.fritz.box> <20171105133929.7cscboxymmpkw634@pali> <20171105140745.ze4ttkazeczrqsy7@pali> <20171105203542.jgupce2usbtjhbg2@thunk.org> <20171105211249.xrg6m6ijjewrpqp2@pali> <20171107172841.twyu7ieekrs6b2da@thunk.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20171107172841.twyu7ieekrs6b2da@thunk.org> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tuesday 07 November 2017 12:28:41 Theodore Ts'o wrote: > On Sun, Nov 05, 2017 at 10:12:49PM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote: > > Easy way how to achieve this situation: > > > > 1. use mkdosfs to format hard disk to FAT32 with label LABEL42 > > > > 2. boot Windows 10 (or XP) and set label of that FAT32 partition to > > empty (via Explorer GUI) > > > > 3. profit > > > > 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. -- Pali Rohár pali.rohar@gmail.com