----- Original Message ---- From: Frank Steinmetzger <war...@gmx.de> > Am Donnerstag, 10. Dezember 2009 schrieb Willie Wong: > > > I heard romours of problems with the current FAT implementation due to > > > M$. I went back to 2.6.30 for the moment. So what???s your proposal? > > > Usually I don???t have the need for ??bercurrent kernels, but would > > > installing 2.6.32 help? > > Did you file a bug? Where did you hear this "rumour"? > I believe heise.de, the publisher of computer magazine c't. I just looked for > it - it was about Microsoft pursuing legal actions against TomTom for using > their FAT file system on their linux based devices. I deduced from that that > they rewrote the FAT driver, but this would seem rather unlikely.
You are referring to the Long File Name issue. Apparently MS has patented how the LFNs are stored in a dual method. The fix Linux employed was to only ever allow a single method storage. This issue does not affect what you are seeing, nor would it affect the FAT driver all that much. >From what I understand (in the various articles, emails, etc. I've seen >on-line), there was no rewrite of the FAT driver; just a slight disabling of some functionality (for the dual mode). Ben
