-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 10:51:54AM +0200, Nicolas George wrote: > Le decadi 30 vendémiaire, an CCXXV, [email protected] a écrit : > > > So there is a major difference in the way Linux and windows handle > > > file naming. The file names look the same on both Linux and windows, > > > but behind the scenes they are not. > > You'd need more evidence to convince me of that. Among other things, > > fat (and even the Rube-Goldbergian vfat) are stable since long, and > > (by current standards) relatively simple. > > There is a major difference in filenames between Linux and Windows, though. > > For Linux, a filename is an arbitrary sequence of octets, with only two > values forbidden: 0x00 used as a string terminator, and 0x2F, used a > directory separator. Translating these sequence into printable string is > entirely up to the applications, with most applications having converged to > UTF-8 nowadays. > > For Windows, a filename is a sequence of Unicode code points, encoded in > various ways: sometimes as UTF-16, sometimes as a legacy 8-bits encoding, > sometimes as UTF-8 masquerading as a legacy 8-bits encoding. On the sectors > of a VFAT device, I think it is UTF-16. > > Since VFAT is a Windows filesystem, Linux has to adapt to handle it, this is > the role of the various nls_* kernel modules.
This is correct. There's even more to it -- Windows is kinda case-insensitive (kinda: it can write upper and lower case, but it doesn't differentiate, a good way to inadvertently overwrite a file :) But all of this doesn't make a file system corrupt. It can produce funny file names, though. regards - -- t -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAlgJ2zwACgkQBcgs9XrR2kYjrgCfcjTRf547SCa+LRg2IL38VYf5 soQAnAzyywsSYJrXMqnfsZ2p3iXfBQRF =Fs4n -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
