From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263148AbTJZN5v (ORCPT ); Sun, 26 Oct 2003 08:57:51 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263154AbTJZN5v (ORCPT ); Sun, 26 Oct 2003 08:57:51 -0500 Received: from mail.parknet.co.jp ([210.171.160.6]:65040 "EHLO mail.parknet.co.jp") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263148AbTJZN5u (ORCPT ); Sun, 26 Oct 2003 08:57:50 -0500 To: Andries.Brouwer@cwi.nl Cc: torvalds@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.0-test9 References: From: OGAWA Hirofumi Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2003 22:57:32 +0900 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <87brs4drub.fsf@devron.myhome.or.jp> User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Andries.Brouwer@cwi.nl writes: > > Pls forward. > > The first FAT entry should have the media byte (0xf0,0xf8,...,0xff) > extended with all 1 bits in the first FAT entry. > Checking this is a good idea, it prevents us from mounting garbage > as FAT - there is no good magic for FAT. > Unfortunately, Windows does not enforce this, and 2.4 doesn't either. > It turns out that there are filesystems around (two reports so far) > that have a zero first FAT entry, and work under Windows and 2.4 but > fail to mount under 2.6. > > So, the below weakens the test. Looks good to me. I have no objection. However, the following may be a bit useful info. I tested on win2k and win95 installed at now. win95's scandisk reported and fixed this problem. win2k's chkdsk detect problem and fixed. But GUI tool doesn't detect, and can't fixed. -- OGAWA Hirofumi