From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752562AbdKEN45 (ORCPT ); Sun, 5 Nov 2017 08:56:57 -0500 Received: from mail-qt0-f181.google.com ([209.85.216.181]:56689 "EHLO mail-qt0-f181.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750725AbdKEN4z (ORCPT ); Sun, 5 Nov 2017 08:56:55 -0500 X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABhQp+QHmkI2iHm8pfyNi3+IhZRD48SgrewDL3MxkFyd1zGqscQ/OfqDUA8emwm4JQyGtVl1sN9q/JX50vSv+3RWVyw= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20171105133929.7cscboxymmpkw634@pali> References: <20171004153332.GA6696@pali> <20171011212435.znmtdnsxcd5ectub@pali> <20171011214426.wa5endlb3kb4yhbv@pali> <20171012085658.iwrusvy4ay4s7hbb@ws.net.home> <20171012092113.2bsb3pzv6un4xahr@pali> <20171012101311.zfvg6edfvszlujom@ws.net.home> <20171012204931.tfd2bhmwu5b6rbpz@pali> <20171016011243.zurh5jhb2y6mczx7@amos.fritz.box> <20171105133929.7cscboxymmpkw634@pali> From: Andy Shevchenko Date: Sun, 5 Nov 2017 15:56:53 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Linux & FAT32 label To: =?UTF-8?Q?Pali_Roh=C3=A1r?= Cc: Andreas Bombe , Karel Zak , util-linux@vger.kernel.org, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , =?UTF-8?Q?Andrius_=C5=A0tikonas?= , Curtis Gedak Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by nfs id vA5Dv2n2026349 On Sun, Nov 5, 2017 at 3:39 PM, Pali Rohár wrote: > On Tuesday 31 October 2017 10:35:48 Andy Shevchenko wrote: >> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 4:12 AM, Andreas Bombe 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: >> > 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 > > I did tests with MS-DOS and Windows versions (results in previous > email), and they seems to be compatible how they read label. > > Based on results I would suggest to ignore label from the boot sector > when reading label. So, for tools which are not doing that to add --ignore-boot-sector-label (or alike) [recommended] right? We don't actually know how many users (scripts) are relying on current behaviour. If there are only few, we may introduce backward compatibility switch --read-boot-sector-label > This makes behavior consistent with older MS-DOS > systems and also all Windows systems. This change would be a problem > only for users who have label stored only in boot sector. After change > they would not see label anymore -- exactly same what MS-DOS or Windows > show them. Seems that mkdosfs stores label to both location, since > support for label was introduced. So different label would be visible > only for users who used dosfslabel prior to version 3.0.16. > > What do you think? So, in summary it looks like a documentation needs update (to mark your research). -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko