On 08.07.2012 01:57, Michael Biebl wrote: > On 08.07.2012 01:52, Michael Biebl wrote: >> since we are already requiring dofstools for mkfs.vfat, is there a >> reason why we don't use dosfslabel instead of mlabel? >> Does mlabel have any features dosfslabel doesn't provide? > > I found this commit > http://cgit.freedesktop.org/udisks/commit/?id=a28f0b6afba339fd9254952394cbff509e3dfff5 > > This commit is already a few years old, so I don't know if those points > are still valid today. > Would be nice somehow to get rid of the additional mtools dependency if > a current dosfstools now provides what is needed.
A quick research indicates that vfat volume labels have these restrictions: - Maximum of 11 characters - No * ? . , ; : / \ | + = < > [ ] - No tabs dosfslabel seems to comply to those restrictions. I couldn't find a reference which says that labels may be 254 characters long. Even when trying with mlabel, it shortens the string to 11 chars. There were also some bug fixes in dosfstools [1] wrt dosfslabel and it seems to work just fine here. It isn't a RH only hack either as it's included in dosfstools upstream. Looks to me, as if switching to dosfslabel should be safe, but I'd appreciate if David and/or Martin could comment on this. Michael [1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=559985 -- Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the universe are pointed away from Earth?
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
