Sharing files between Ubuntu 6.06 and Windows XP Pro - best disk format to use

[Ouattara Oumar Aziz]

Felipe Alfaro Solana a écrit :
> On 2/4/07, Ouattara Oumar Aziz <wattazoum at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Felipe Alfaro Solana a écrit :
>>> On 2/4/07, Yagnesh Desai <ynd at lntenc.com> wrote:
>>>> Eric;
>>>>
>>>> The most reliable option is to use the FAT32 file format.
>>>> I am using it this way on my LAPTOP.
>>> I guess that you mean "the easiest". FAT is anything but reliable.
>>>
>> Please, tell us why you think FAT isn't reliable.
> 
> It's patented, doesn't support transactions/atomic operations, uses an
> antiquated and obsolete method to store metadata with very simple
> redundancy (first FAT copy, second FAT copy), doesn't support
> permissions./ACLs, maximum file size is limited to 4GB, its get
> fragmented easily, tends to destroy the first few blocks of Flash/NAND
> memories since the FAT table is stored at the very beginning of the
> disk, etc.
> 
> Other than that, FAT works pretty well for floppy disks, USB keys and
> really small hard disks. For something, I would use a modern
> filesystem.

So none of what you've mentionned above is a problem for the OP who is 
looking for a Filesystem that Windows and Linux support well. Neither 
you've proven the more possible lost of datas.
The question here was not what's the best Filesystem. Else, that thread 
would have become a Troll as even between advanced FS, we can't 
determine which is the best.

I do agree with all the feature FAT is lacking but, to me, that's the 
best FS for the OP.