Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 22:05:03 +0200 From: Polytropon <freebsd@edvax.de> To: "Andrew Gould" <andrewlylegould@gmail.com> Cc: FreeBSD Questions Mailing List <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: OT: most "universal" file system for 1TB external USB2 hard drive Message-ID: <20080822220503.29de18ee.freebsd@edvax.de> In-Reply-To: <d356c5630808221113x7e931338k532c9a8f1f126aac@mail.gmail.com> References: <d356c5630808221113x7e931338k532c9a8f1f126aac@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 22 Aug 2008 13:13:29 -0500, "Andrew Gould" <andrewlylegould@gmail.com> wrote: > I couldn't help myself. During lunch, I found a 3.5" 1TB SATA internal HD > **and** a USB2 HD enclosure for SATA drives on sale at large % discounts. > It was more than I could resist. > > The operating systems in my home include FreeBSD, NetBSD, Mac OS X and > Windows XP Pro. If I want all of these systems to be able to read and write > to the drive, what file system should I use? I know fat32 is pretty > universal, but is it advisable? Well, the filesystem with the most interchange quality isn't a real file system - it's tar. Inside the UNIX world, it's very welcome if you need to exchange data from, let's say, Sun, SGI and x86 UNIX systems using a physical device. Because "Windows" is intendedly not able to access file systems that are not made by MICROS~1, UFS (which you could access from Mac OS X as well as from the BSDs) would be a good choice, but it can't be chose due to your requirements in this setting. Something like an MS-DOS filesystem would be accessible from all the systems you mentioned, but it doesn't bring you much comfort (for example no user management, no access rights). -- Polytropon >From Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080822220503.29de18ee.freebsd>