Reliability of USB-based filesystems? Lack thereof?

[Lennart Sorensen]

On Wed, Nov 05, 2008 at 11:37:56PM -0500, D. Hugh Redelmeier wrote:
> Why the heck does the spec talk about the file system level?  None of
> its business I'd say.

Well in the case of SD it is.  Any device that claims SD compatibility
MUST support FAT16.  Any device claiming SDHC compatibility MUST support
FAT32.  It is in the spec.  Cards should be preformated that way too.

The spec does not say you can't support other filesystems too, but those
ones are the minimum requirements.  Also compatiblity with other devices
is only expected if you use that filesystem.

The SD spec is very much about making sure things just work for your
typical user, and by specifying the filesystem, it takes care of that.

Any SD card over 2GB that doesn't say SDHC, is not an SD card, but a
mangled device made by a few companies.  Those technically are not even
allowed to carry the SD logo although most still did.

> Chris: have you tried EXT2 (I think that EXT3's journalling is a Bad
> Thing for flash)?

journalling is just fine if the wear leveling works properly on the
device.

-- 
Len Sorensen
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://gtalug.org/
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://gtalug.org/wiki/Mailing_lists