>Just out of interest, How does your FAT32 partition show up under
> fdisk? When I was installing 5.1 for the first time I didn't realise that
> it had FAT32 support so I didn't even bother trying to mount it.. But I do
> remember that I got some very strange error messages about that pa
> Doesn't support FAT32? I know this is incorrect since I'm using a
> stable release (2.0.34) that certainly does support FAT32. It's
great to
> be able to steal 95's HD space. 8-)
> --
> Doug
Just out of interest, How does your FAT32 partition s
>VFAT is NOT FAT32.
>VFAT is FAT16 with Long File Names.
>FAT32 is a new form of FAT16 that has smaller cluster sizes and >allows
>partition sizes up to 2 Terabytes.
>The "stable" kernel doesn't support it as is, but there is a >development
>driver available.
Nonsense. 2.0.34 supports VFAT and F
> VFAT is NOT FAT32.
This is true, but to mount FAT32 under kernel 2.0.34, you use filesystem
type of "vfat".
> VFAT is FAT16 with Long File Names.
> FAT32 is a new form of FAT16 that has smaller cluster sizes and allows
> partition sizes up to 2 Terabytes.
Hmmm... I'm not sure about that. FAT
Not really a problem I guess. I've installed RedHat 5.1 and mounted my
Win95 partition as MS-DOS partition in RH. After the installation, I
modified the file /etc/fstab and changed the word "msdos" in "vfat" for
this partition and it's working OK.
Regards, Ruud.
> This is a problem with 5.1? I'
VFAT is NOT FAT32.
VFAT is FAT16 with Long File Names.
FAT32 is a new form of FAT16 that has smaller cluster sizes and allows
partition sizes up to 2 Terabytes.
The "stable" kernel doesn't support it as is, but there is a development
driver available. I don't know where you can find it, though, be
>
This is a problem with 5.1? I've been using vfat with 4.2 for a long time now.
Have you tried getting the kernel source (not the RH distribution, the "real"
one) and building it? Sorry I don't have the ftp address for it just now---I
was upgrading to 5.1 and had a little accident. Soon as I g
