Pythagoras1 wrote:the only expirences i made with fat/vfat were that sometimes windows couldn't read files written by linux.
I've experienced that in the past, but only with hard disk partitions that were created and written to first by Linux. If the partition is created in Windows and/or if Windows is the first to write files to the partition, I've had no such problems. I've also never had this problem with floppies. OTOH, I've not investigated this problem in depth, and my last experience with it was literally years ago.
On another matter, there seems to be some confusion in some posts in this thread about certain terminology. FAT varies in two orthogonal ways: FAT size (12-, 16-, or 32-bit, aka FAT-12, FAT-16, or FAT-32; note that in this context, "FAT" refers to a specific critical data structure in the FAT filesystem) and long filename (LFN) support (short, aka "8.3," filenames; VFAT long filenames; and UMSDOS long filenames). Linux's drivers auto-detect the FAT size; there's no such thing as separate FAT-32 vs. FAT-16 drivers. There is a mount option to force the driver to use a particular FAT size, though. Where the Linux
does use separate drivers is in the long filename arena. The "msdos" filesystem type code implements 8.3 filenames, the "vfat" driver implements VFAT long filenames, and the "umsdos" driver implements UMSDOS long filenames. (UMSDOS is a somewhat rarely-used way to store Linux long filenames, file permissions, file ownership, and other features on a FAT filesystem). Note that these two issues (FAT size and LFN support) are entirely independent; you can have 12-bit FATs with VFAT (as in a floppy disk), 32-bit FATs without LFNs (rare, but do-able), or any other combination. Also, the LFN support is handled at mount time by the OS support. DOS can read a VFAT or UMSDOS disk just fine, but it'll only see 8.3 filenames. Linux or Windows can take a DOS floppy and mount it using LFN options, in which case existing filenames won't be changed but LFN files can be added to the disk.