LinuxQuestions.org
Download your favorite Linux distribution at LQ ISO.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - General
User Name
Password
Linux - General This Linux forum is for general Linux questions and discussion.
If it is Linux Related and doesn't seem to fit in any other forum then this is the place.

Notices

Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 01-31-2006, 04:49 AM   #1
Luke771
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2005
Location: Sol III, Milky Way
Distribution: Ubuntu
Posts: 43

Rep: Reputation: 15
Files > 4GB on FAT32


Do FAT32 support files bigger than 4GB under Linux? (Ubuntu 5.10)
I ask because it does not under windows and I wonder if the limitation is in the file system itself or in the windows OS.
 
Old 01-31-2006, 05:34 AM   #2
jlliagre
Moderator
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: Outside Paris
Distribution: Solaris10, Solaris 11, Mint, OL
Posts: 9,499

Rep: Reputation: 355Reputation: 355Reputation: 355Reputation: 355
The limitation is in the file system.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_Allocation_Table

Someting funny found on the Microsoft web site:
Quote:
The largest file that can exist on a FAT32 drive is 4 GB, which is probably larger than any file will ever be anyway.


It reminds me Bill Gates telling PCs won't ever have as much RAM as 640 Kbytes ...
 
Old 01-31-2006, 05:49 AM   #3
cs-cam
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2004
Location: Australia
Distribution: Gentoo
Posts: 3,544
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 56
If you need it under Windows, NTFS will support files much larger than that.
 
Old 01-31-2006, 06:05 AM   #4
Luke771
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2005
Location: Sol III, Milky Way
Distribution: Ubuntu
Posts: 43

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 15
And why would I need it under windows? eeww!
No, it was only an "academic" question (or "aCCademic" or whatever)

About "the largest file ever" no bigger than 4 gig, we all know how how fast things go in computers: it was not long ago when talked about 2GB hard disks in terms of "you will never need all that space anyway" and only 3 or 4 years ago 40GB was "unbelieveable big"... and a 600MhZ processor more than any home user will ever need. Funny Microsoft quote, and 100% Micosoft style.

BTW, I saw one of the first hard disks once, it was a 20 lb copper *UFO*, some 15'' in diameter and could hold 5 MB (and it was not usable)

Last edited by Luke771; 01-31-2006 at 06:19 AM.
 
Old 01-31-2006, 07:29 AM   #5
guysoft
Member
 
Registered: Jun 2004
Location: israel
Distribution: mandrake, MEPIS and menny live-cds
Posts: 71

Rep: Reputation: 16
Accturly i mannged to dd a file bigger than 4gb to fat32, i am not shure how thaugh, it didnt work a seccond time.

As for microsoft.. they tend to get it worng with file sizes.
 
Old 01-31-2006, 08:23 AM   #6
jlliagre
Moderator
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: Outside Paris
Distribution: Solaris10, Solaris 11, Mint, OL
Posts: 9,499

Rep: Reputation: 355Reputation: 355Reputation: 355Reputation: 355
Quote:
Originally Posted by guysoft
Accturly i mannged to dd a file bigger than 4gb to fat32, i am not shure how thaugh, it didnt work a seccond time.
You think you did, but you didn't.
 
Old 01-31-2006, 09:06 PM   #7
KimVette
Senior Member
 
Registered: Dec 2004
Location: Lee, NH
Distribution: OpenSUSE, CentOS, RHEL
Posts: 1,794

Rep: Reputation: 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luke771
And why would I need it under windows? eeww!
No, it was only an "academic" question (or "aCCademic" or whatever)

About "the largest file ever" no bigger than 4 gig, we all know how how fast things go in computers: it was not long ago when talked about 2GB hard disks in terms of "you will never need all that space anyway" and only 3 or 4 years ago 40GB was "unbelieveable big"... and a 600MhZ processor more than any home user will ever need. Funny Microsoft quote, and 100% Micosoft style.

BTW, I saw one of the first hard disks once, it was a 20 lb copper *UFO*, some 15'' in diameter and could hold 5 MB (and it was not usable)
40GB was "unbelievably big" about eight years ago, fwiw (I had two lowly 27GB drives then plus a bunch of 6.4GB and a couple of 18GB SCSI drives). I had a machine with two(!!) 80GB drives and one 60GB drive in 2000 or 2001, and those drives are still happily chugging along.
 
Old 02-01-2006, 05:43 AM   #8
guysoft
Member
 
Registered: Jun 2004
Location: israel
Distribution: mandrake, MEPIS and menny live-cds
Posts: 71

Rep: Reputation: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by KimVette
40GB was "unbelievably big" about eight years ago, fwiw (I had two lowly 27GB drives then plus a bunch of 6.4GB and a couple of 18GB SCSI drives). I had a machine with two(!!) 80GB drives and one 60GB drive in 2000 or 2001, and those drives are still happily chugging along.
Things are getting bigger in a logarithmic scale.

BTW, to Luke771. i guess the solution is to open another ext3 partition... you can (if for some really strange reason) access it in window XP and 200 with th IFS driver just like any old partition.
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Burning 4GB+ Files? Matir Linux - Software 3 05-06-2005 05:00 PM
Problems making files bigger than 4Gb. Riddick Linux - Software 9 08-20-2004 09:27 AM
Certain FAT32 files become empty shoota Linux - General 2 11-07-2003 07:20 AM
can't see files on fat32 tunny Debian 9 09-03-2003 05:59 PM
Samba serving files > 4Gb Paul Johnson Linux - Software 3 07-08-2003 02:39 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:03 AM.

Main Menu
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration