[ubuntu-uk] Chkdsk for NTFS partition

[David King]

Actually the max partition size for FAT32 is around 2 TB, which is a lot 
more than your 160 GB.

However, if you were using Windows, its partition formatter does not 
allow you to format FAT32 partitions that big, probably because MS want 
everyone to use NTFS (especially in the days when Linux could not access 
NTFS).

But you are limited to a max file size of 4 GB in FAT32.

I have used NTFS partitions in Ubuntu (I was pleasantly surprised that 
they were automatically mount RW, when some Linux distros still could 
only mount them read-only), and not had a problem with them, but now I 
just format every new partition as ext3, as I no longer use Windows 
much, other than in a virtual machine. I find that Windows XP Pro in 
Virtual Box boots in about 14 seconds to the desktop, whereas on an 
older PC which still has WinXP Pro on it, it still takes a few minutes. 
In a virtual machine, it does not matter how the partitions are formatted.

I would agree with the others and format the new drive as ext3. You also 
get file permissions, etc., with ext3 which do not exist on NTFS or 
FAT32 partitions.

Of course, if this USB drive is quite old, then maybe the problem with 
mounting it in Ubuntu is down to hardware failure, or possibly just an 
imminent failure that Ubuntu is sensing and not wanting to make you 
over-confident about the drive's abilities, is not allowing you to mount it.


David King



Neil Greenwood wrote:
> 2009/1/14 Michael Holloway <michael at thedarkwinter.com>:
>   
>> Hi
>>
>> To be honest, if you don't have windows, you might as well format the
>> disc as EXT3, or even FAT32 if you are think you might be plugging into
>> a windows machine at some time. I don't 100% trust using NTFS under
>> Linux, and the problem you have come across here supports that.
>>
>> Also, am I missing something? Why do you need a manual for a USB hard
>> drive :)
>>
>>     
>
> Don't know! But until I take a peek, I'd like to leave the option open.
>
> I will be reformatting the disc soon. I think, at 160Gb, it's too big
> for a single FAT32 partition, but I haven't checked yet.
>
>
> Mainly, I was just curious about a non-Windows alternative for solving
> the error that cropped up. I can see why only a Windows solution was
> made (you're unlikely to have a NTFS disk without also having
> Windows).
>
> Cofion,
> Neil.
>
>