[arch-dev-public] our FAT support and Microsoft

[Daniel Isenmann]

On Sun, 3 May 2009 10:12:03 +0200
Andreas Radke <a.radke at arcor.de> wrote:

> Am Fri, 3 Apr 2009 07:59:37 +0200 (CEST)
> schrieb Andreas Radke <a.radke at arcor.de>:
> 
> > http://www.linux-foundation.org/weblogs/jzemlin/2009/03/31/on-the-tomtom-settlement-microsoft-rolls-back-its-%E2%80%9Copen%E2%80%9D-promises/
> > 
> > I haven't done further investigations but it seems we should take
> > care about keep supporting the FAT file system.
> > 
> > How is the state with NTFS? Is the license situation there more
> > safe?
> > 
> > Opinions?
> > 
> > -Andy
> > 
> 
> Kernel developers are working on it:
> 
> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.file-systems/31491/
> 
> We might think to use this option in our next kernel packages.

I think this a step backwards if we do this. We loose functionality
in (correct) writing nearly all USB mass storage devices. Why
should we do that? I think this is only really important to companies
which sell embedded linux, like Jan mentioned it. 

-1 from my side for doing this. 

Cheers,
 Daniel