[OT] FAT32 vs NTFS

[Joaquin]

This probaly is not all that recommended to use FAT32.  FAT32 could get
corrupted easily, especially is system gets shut off accidently (no
battery for instance).  Have you considered perhaps partitioning the
system.  Have a FAT32 for data and Win 9X/Me type of Oses, and an
extended NTFS for Windows base OS (HAL, registry, drivers, etc.).

 - Joaquin

> -----Original Message-----
> From: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com
> [mailto:cygwin-owner@cygwin.com] On Behalf Of Jani tiainen
> Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2004 2:16 AM
> To: cygwin@cygwin.com
> Subject: [OT] FAT32 vs NTFS
>
>
> Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > Try to figure out what happens on your system.  However, if you're
> > running 2K or XP, I don't see a reason to keep FAT32.  You
> can convert
> > it to NTFS using the "convert" tool which is shipped with all NT
> > versions.
>
> For some reason my laptop (HP Omnibook) came with
> preinstalled W2k, and
> there is really FAT32 enabled, not NTFS...
>
> Only reason to use FAT32 is to preserve few bytes of memory
> or let disk
> data be accessible from some other system than NT/W2k/XP.
>
> But for performance reasons it would really be reasonable to
> use ntfs...
>
> --
>
> Jani Tiainen
>
> --
> Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
> Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
> Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
> FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
>
>



--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/