Re: [MiNT] Partition sizes

[Peter Slegg <p.slegg@scubadivers.co.uk>]

On Fri, 20 Aug 2010 17:52:25 , Alan Hourihane <alanh@fairlite.co.uk> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2010-08-20 at 17:31 +0200, Peter Slegg wrote:
> > On Fri, 20 Aug 2010 17:01:31 , Alan Hourihane <alanh@fairlite.co.uk> wrote:
> > > Potentially corruption, maybe truncating the file, if it opens it with
> > > write access. Read only would just trigger an early EOF when it really
> > > isn't.
> > >
> > > > Would we need two different partition types ?
> > >
> > > Partitions types, or rather filesystems - as a partition type is just a
> > > value and it's the filesystem that has the characteristics, have their
> > > own file size restrictions, see Davids post.
> > >
> > > Alan.
> > >
> >
> > I was thinking back to the days of biggem and the like.
> > Were the GEMDOS calls always 32 bit ?
> >
> > If the 32 bit is made, could GEMDOS check that the partition is
> > of a certain "type" and allow the call. If the partition is 64 bit
> > style then the call could return an error.
> >
> > This would hopefully prevent corruption when the user is using an
> > old application to access a more modern fs.
>
> Whoa. Slow down. 64bit file access is no small task, trying doing
> without it for quite a while unless someone steps up.
>
> Alan.
>

All just specualtion at the moment. Just floating a few thoughts while they
came to mind.

Peter