fat32

I'm currently trying to code a FAT system in C on a Xillinx Kintex 7 card. It is equipped with a MicroBlaze and I've already managed to create most of the required functions. The problem I'm facing is about the total capacity of a folder, I've read on the web that in FAT32 a folder should be able to contain more than 65 000 files but with the system I've put in place I'm limited to 509 files per folder. I think it's because of my comprehension of the way FAT32 works but here's what I've made so far: I've created a format function that writes the correct data in the MBR (sector 0) and the

I googled a lot and I couldn't find any answer to this problem... I have a C++ console application that reads a 1GB SD card that fixes improperly closed files and writes the FAT table accordingly. The SD card is written at the beginning by a firmware in a custom made device. It worked OK up to Xp and stopped working in Win Vista/seven. I tried elevating privileges: within an administrator account type, I launched a cmd window using the "run as administrator" method but no luck. I also tried with a manifest asking for highestAvailable privileges but no luck. I read in some post that “Windows

I'm not looking for a workaround; I'd like an explanation. Most of the links I found through Google just tell me that the file limit is 4GB, but not why. I am aware of the explanation by Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_Allocation_Table#FAT32 But this still does not go into detail about why. (What does SCANDISK have to do with it?) Maybe then I will understand whether it's possible to overcome the 4GB file size limit. To extend that answer, FAT32 is derived from FAT16 and FAT12. When FAT12 was introduced, PCs ran a 16-bit OS, and there were no drives larger than ten megabytes. I

In C-language, what are the most appropriate format specifiers for data type BYTE, WORD and DWORD to be used with printf and scanf functions? I am having a hard time displaying BPB field's values over console. For example, if I am trying to display BPB_BytsPerSec using "%lu", I am getting unusual figures.. printf("Bytes per Sector: %lu", b->BPB_BytsPerSec); I am getting a value of "514", which I believe, is wrong interpretation.. Please suggest the way out. Thanks. (I am using gcc 5.1 via MinGW, over a 64bit Windows) Here is the Structure We are talking about: /* BPB Structure Collected from

I work on a Mercurial repository that is checked out onto an Unix filesystem such as ext3 on some machines, and FAT32 on others. In Subversion, I can set the svn:executable property to control whether a file should be marked executable when checked out on a platform that supports such a bit. I can do this regardless of the platform I'm running SVN on or the filesystem containing my working copy. In Mercurial, I can chmod +x to get the same effect if the clone is on a Unix filesystem. But how can I set (or remove) the executable bit on a file on a FAT filesystem? Mercurial tracks the execute

I know FAT32, as well as FAT16/12 neither support symbolic links nor hard-links . However I came up with this idea: The FAT specification describes that every file is associated with a directory-entry. In my understanding, one could say that a file-entry in a directory somehow or other points to the file's content. So, how can I define two directory-entries which point to the same file-content? Or, what could prevent me from doing so? Use case: I have a USB mass storage device for my car radio, and I want to use directories as playlists since the radio software doesn't support playlists. So it

I have a project written for Android devices. It generates a large number of files, each day. These are all text files and images. The app uses a database to reference these files. The app is supposed to clear up these files after a little use (perhaps after a few days), but this process may or may not be working. This is not the subject of this question. Due to a historic accident, the organization of the files are somewhat naive: everything is in the same directory; a .hidden directory which contains a zero byte .nomedia file to prevent the MediaScanner indexing it. Today, I am seeing an