Bug 599464
Summary: | mkfs-b does not support vfat/ntfs | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Community] Virtualization Tools | Reporter: | Jinxin Zheng <jzheng> | |
Component: | libguestfs | Assignee: | Richard W.M. Jones <rjones> | |
Status: | CLOSED UPSTREAM | QA Contact: | ||
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | ||
Priority: | low | |||
Version: | unspecified | CC: | mbooth, virt-maint, yuzhang | |
Target Milestone: | --- | |||
Target Release: | --- | |||
Hardware: | All | |||
OS: | Linux | |||
Whiteboard: | ||||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | ||
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | ||
Clone Of: | ||||
: | 600148 (view as bug list) | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2011-07-14 19:12:46 UTC | Type: | --- | |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- | |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | ||
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | ||
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | ||
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | ||
Embargoed: | ||||
Bug Depends On: | ||||
Bug Blocks: | 600148 |
Description
Jinxin Zheng
2010-06-03 10:03:46 UTC
(In reply to comment #0) > Additional info: > The windows vfat and ntfs file systems have different definition for the 'block > size' of unix file systems like ext2/3 -- 'sector size', which (I think) is a > same concept as block size. > > The mkdosfs and mkntfs utilities do not support the -b option (actually mkdosfs > do have a -b option which has a completely different meaning). However, the > sector sizes of the vfat and ntfs can be set via > mkdosfs -S > and > mkntfs -s I think a closer analogy to blocksize is clustersize. It appears that sector size should always be related to the physical sector size of the device (ie. 512 or 4096). We can adjust the clustersize using the appropriate flags, and document this. In the long term it may be better to have explicit DOS and NTFS creation functions that allow all the tunables to be presented. Patch posted upstream: https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2010-June/msg00045.html (In reply to comment #1) > In the long term it may be better to have explicit > DOS and NTFS creation functions that allow all the > tunables to be presented. Agree this is a solution making better sense. (In reply to comment #2) > Patch posted upstream: > https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2010-June/msg00045.html Tested the patches. Looks good to me. |