Add filesytem type NTFS to config

[Tony Lambregts]

Francois Gouget wrote:

>On Tue, 14 Jan 2003, Tony Lambregts wrote:
>[...]
>  
>
>>>AFAIK, read-write CDs use a special filesystem so they probably get
>>>their own value.
>>>      
>>>
>
>Confirmed: you can use ISO9660 (or ext2fs for that matter), but if you
>want to use your CDRW as a big floppy drive on Windows, then you would
>use UDF (google CDRW UDF).
>
OK CD-W/RW and DVD-R/RW can use UDF (Universal Disk Format) but what is 
reported by the various flavors of windows (right click - Properties)? 
My guess - CDFS

>
>
>  
>
>>Samba probably reports whatever the share's underlying
>>    
>>
>>>filesystem is (at least if the server is a Windows machine).
>>>      
>>>
>
>IIRC, right-click -> Properties on a shared drive tells you what
>filesystem the remote computer is using for that filesystem. It does not
>mean that Windows is not returning some strange value in the function
>you are concerned about but I don't have a way of checking that.  What
>about providing a test app that would enumerate drives and dump the
>values reported by Windows?
>
Is there a real need for such a conformance test. It seems to me that it 
would be of little value (right click - Properties tells us the same thing)

I do not have another computer to test Samba but IIRC Novell returned 
FAT for its drives circa  Novell 3.1. and again IIRC Windows 98 returns 
NTFS when connected to a NTFS drive on a NT Server.  I could be wrong 
and have no way of checking for myself (aside from Google)

>
>
>  
>
>>I suspect
>>    
>>
>>>zip drives just use what the user chooses, i.e. FAT or VFAT, maybe FAT32
>>>though that seems quite unnecessary given their limited size.
>>>      
>>>
>
>Confirmed. I asked a collegue who has a Zip drive and they behave just
>like other removable media (floppies). So you use the usual way to
>format such things so what you get is a FAT disk. Depends on your
>Windows OS of course. On Windows 95 you would get VFAT, on Windows 98SE
>you may get FAT32 instead.
>Of course that does not mean that Windows is not checking that this is a
>Zip drive+FAT combination to return 'foobar' rather than just FAT. But
>it does seem relatively improbable.
>
There was some kind of calculation that windows 95/8 does. Past 
experience has indicated that drives less than 128 MB can not be 
formated FAT32. A quick search of google points out that disks that are 
smaller than 260 mb are formated with a sector size 512KB. So some 
drives in the range 128 - 265 that have a minimum (built in) sector size 
of 1024 (lots of them) cannot be formated FAT32  

This is rather academic since even  DVD-RW is limited to 1.7GB wich is 
less than the 2GB limit for FAT

>
>
>  
>
>>AFAICS you are just guessing. I can do that... but it is not a good way
>>to build specs.
>>    
>>
>
>Not really guessing. Just providing a dump of my fuzzy memories of past
>experiences and stuff I read in the hope that it can guide your search
>about an exhaustive list of Windows supported filesystems.
>
>You asked: Any other thing I missed?
>
>At least you missed the filesystem used for CDRW: UDF. Again maybe the
>function you are concerned about will call that CDFS or billfs. But now
>you know that you need to ask someone with a CDRW drive to check what
>the function returns for that drive.
>
>
>  
>
It is not as if I could not make an educated guess myself about these 
things (and google is my friend) Most of the time FAT _works_ the fact 
that Virtual Dub checks for "FAT" is probably an annomaly.  When dealing 
with *nix drives does it matter whether we tell it  "FAT32" or "NTFS". 
They are both _LIES_, by adding "NTFS" It gives the user another 
CASE_PRESERVING option without confusing the user to much.  

I would still like to know (for sure) what is retured by the for network 
drives (NT, Novell, Samba, Mac Server?) The same goes for CD/DVD-R/RW 
using UDF. So far I have seen no advantage in doing something more 
elegant (complicated).


-- 

Tony Lambregts