TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

BigFAT – Backward compatible FAT extension for unlimited file size

196 点作者 FrankSansC超过 2 年前

16 条评论

mort96超过 2 年前
I like the idea. Making it backwards compatible with FAT means that, in principle, regular FAT filesystem implementations could be transparently changed to support big fat files (hehe) transparently.<p>However, reading the spec, it doesn&#x27;t look fully backwards compatible? It seems like there are file structures which are possible to represent in FAT which aren&#x27;t possible to represent in BigFAT. In FAT, I could have a 4GB-128kB size file called &quot;hello.txt&quot;, and next to it, a file called &quot;hello.txt.000.BigFAT&quot;. A FAT filesystem will show this as intended, but a BigFAT implementation will show it as one file&#x27; &quot;hello.txt&quot;. That makes this a breaking change.<p>I would kind of have hoped that they had found an unused but always-zero bit in some header which could be repurposed to identify whether a file has a continuation or not, or some other clever way of ensuring that you can represent all legal FAT32 file structures.
评论 #32749902 未加载
评论 #32751394 未加载
评论 #32753207 未加载
评论 #32763689 未加载
kmeisthax超过 2 年前
&gt;Unfortunately, exFAT has been adopted by the SD Association as the default file system for SDXC cards larger than 32 GB. In our view, this should never have happened, as it forces anyone who wants to access SDXC cards to get a license from Microsoft, basically making this a field owned by Microsoft.<p>So, this is a bit of a cultural&#x2F;perception gap between FOSS developers and standards bodies. Most standards bodies have a patent policy of &quot;as long as all the standards-essential patents are licensable for a uniform fee, we&#x27;re good&quot;. Convincing patent holders to not extract royalties from their patents for the sake of easing the lives of FOSS implementers is much, much harder[0].<p>Microsoft isn&#x27;t even the only SEP holder for SD, and the standard makes no attempt at being a royalty-free standard. In fact, early SD standards were NDA&#x27;d[1] and prohibited FOSS implementation <i>at all</i>.<p>[0] In fact, so hard that the EU has a conspiracy theory that Google&#x2F;AOM bullied a patent holder into doing this<p>[1] Remember, SD cards were basically MMC with primitive DRM
CodesInChaos超过 2 年前
Are the exFAT patents still a problem nowadays?<p>&gt; exFAT was a proprietary file system until 2019, when Microsoft released the specification and allowed OIN members to use their patents.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;ExFAT#Legal_status" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;ExFAT#Legal_status</a>
评论 #32750824 未加载
评论 #32750730 未加载
评论 #32752055 未加载
mikece超过 2 年前
&gt; Why not exFAT... Microsoft owns several patents, and anyone who implements or uses exFAT technology needs Microsoft&#x27;s permission, which typically also includes paying fees to Microsoft.<p>While BigFAT not being encumbered by any patents is a good thing, the camera industry have pretty much standardized on exFAT for their removable file storage format. Something I&#x27;m curious about is how a 5GB video file (quite common and actually on the smaller size for 4K and 8K recording sessions) is written and accessed between the two file systems. BigFAT says that the file would be written in 4GB chunks; is there something similar happening with exFAT or is the file &quot;one chunk?&quot; (Apologies if I have the terms wrong -- I&#x27;m not a filesystem expert.) The author laments that the exFAT format has been adopted for SDXC cards but given who all is in this group and what their use cases are I can discount &quot;because Microsoft strong-armed them&quot; as a reason for them selecting it.
评论 #32749637 未加载
评论 #32749460 未加载
评论 #32749501 未加载
phkahler超过 2 年前
The question I have is, why Segger? When I saw this I was like &quot;the debugger company?!?!&quot; Clearly this wouldn&#x27;t fall under their business, so it makes sense for them to open it up, but why did they do it in the first place?
评论 #32752094 未加载
评论 #32751133 未加载
ninefathom超过 2 年前
I&#x27;m a bit puzzled as to how split files with name standardization is an &quot;extension.&quot; It seems to me that SEGGER is simply proposing a de facto file naming convention, and offering a few free tools (including a few abstraction drivers) to encourage adoption.<p>Can somebody fill me in, here- where&#x27;s the value in what SEGGER is proposing, as opposed to what the entire IT community has already been doing for decades?
评论 #32749754 未加载
评论 #32750383 未加载
评论 #32750244 未加载
评论 #32751033 未加载
sampa超过 2 年前
If only they released it back when exFAT was released. Now it has no future.
bArray超过 2 年前
Is this only compatible with FAT32, or is it also compatible with FAT12&#x2F;16? It would be very cool if this would support floppy disks.<p>Regarding the format, once you convert it, does the target device need to have a driver to support the format? It mentions that this would allow for &gt; 4GB files for TVs, but these are typically non-updated very out of date OSes.<p>I think MS missed a trick by not making the boot sector also contain a simplistic driver, although it would have been a push to keep it all down at 512 bytes.
评论 #32753702 未加载
评论 #32757757 未加载
JAA1337超过 2 年前
Awesome concept, especially for academia ... but is there a value proposition?<p>I love seeing this, don&#x27;t get me wrong. I am just curious is there are any real world applications for this?
评论 #32749795 未加载
评论 #32750192 未加载
评论 #32749884 未加载
scohesc超过 2 年前
Would it not be possible to create a filesystem with modern capabilities but with backwards compatibility with FAT? Why can&#x27;t we just have &quot;legacy&quot; commands built into the ReFS filesystem that process any FAT filesystem access?<p>I&#x27;m very ignorant to this but I&#x27;d love some insight from someone vastly more knowledgeable than me.
评论 #32760288 未加载
steeleduncan超过 2 年前
Is there a linux kernel driver for this somewhere?
stuaxo超过 2 年前
If they want it to spread they should also write a fuse implementation and think about operating system support for Linux or BSD.
tumetab1超过 2 年前
The thing missing on the page is some kind of performance benchmark which I would love to read&#x2F;see.
quickthrower2超过 2 年前
Is the big file handling seemless? If not why not just split files and use regular FAT32.<p>And what about converting FAT32 to a linux partition? Or buy a new disk and move data over to that.<p>Edit: it is a genuine question. downvote implies not but honestly it is.
tekchip超过 2 年前
How is this not BackFAT?
tzahifadida超过 2 年前
Looks good. Keep at it!