![]() | ||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Maciej Zenczykowski <maze@cela.pl> writes: > > Bad hack? Why? Do you know how mount operation is dangerous and it's > > difficult for fatfs? Do you want to handle the any format as FAT? > > > > This is completely unrelated to handling the cache. > > How about not playing around with fat detection and instead implement a > force mount flag for FAT, which would ignore all (most?) detection errors. > Of course if errors occured later you'd end up with a R/O filesystem. And if > you forced something that wasn't FAT, you'd be screwed... but that's to be > expected... Yes, this flag would be one of candidates... However the scandisk/chkdisk of windows fixed this bad format. Such a fsck may be best solution, I think. Well, since the number of blacklists is three, I would like to wait the more report before doing anything. Thanks. -- OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp> - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | |||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 12:59 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | ||||||||||