My understanding is that the exfat filesystem was developed to provide a widely-compatible, relatively simple filesystem to allow large volumes to be mounted on a variety of devices. So why, when I put a 16GB exfat-formatted SD card into my laptop, does Mint 16 say: Obviously this being Linux the error message is completely unhelpful and bafflingly full of pseudorandom numbers, duplicated information and generalised verbosity, but am I to gather from this that linux doesn't understand exfat? I mean, OK, if it was HFS+, or NTFS, or something esoteric like ZFS, but exfat? exfat, for crap's sake? P
Ignoring your usual attacks on Linux, exfat isn't supported as standard in most distributions because Microsoft has placed restrictions on its use and distribution which prevent them from doing so. It's a simple fix, however. (Incidentally, NTFS would work fine - read and write.) Now, fancy sticking an ext4 - an open source format with no restrictions that would prevent Microsoft from implementing it - hard drive into Windows and seeing how helpful the error message you get is?
According to the internet... "The exFAT file system is not supported natively on Linux because it is developed by Microsoft and it comes with restrictive license which doesn't allow open-source operating system to implement it natively."
No, exFAT was developed to provide Microsoft a simpler filesystem which they can licence thanks to the patents, unlike FAT16/32.
It took 5 seconds to Google a page with the same instructions as Gareth has linked to. Anyway if you want cross platform why not use fat 32 or ntfs?
tbh I've never heard of exfat. NTFS works fine cross platform. Mint [15, cinnamon] automatically detects and mounts my NTFS windows drives, as well as my SD cards (says they are MSDOS filesystem, which I assume means FAT). You seem to be annoyed at linux giving you so much information for the error - which is odd because that information is very useful to use for searching for a solutions online. When you're trying new things on linux you often hit a lot of bumps, thankfully the community is excellent and there's almost always an old forum post or another user who can help you out.
What, and they haven't on NTFS? And if it's that legally difficult why is it so easy to add? And if it's so easy to do why do I have to type three lines of code to add and remove devices? And why do you have to type "sudo" so much? And doesn't making "sudo" a customary prefix to every command make it entirely meaningless as a security or safety check? Why, Linux? Why you so cripplingly, tongue-chewingly stupid?
Poor, poor Phil. So desperate to 'prove' that Linux is teh suxx0r, and all he's done is make himself look incredibly stupid. Your transparent attempts at FUD are falling flat; notice how everyone who has commented on this 'ere thread thinks the problem lies with you, rather than Linux. Google is that-away. Use it. Oh, and I'm still waiting for you to show me the helpful, simple-to-understand error message you get when connecting an ext4 drive to Windows.
I'm not seeking to prove anything nor am I desperate (I am not desperate because I still have the win7 disks for the laptop!). I'm just relating my experiences. I wonder why you find it so threatening. For what it's worth, I don't have any ext4 drives! However, I and lots of people I know use exfat devices - or more to the point we just use flash cards without particularly caring what filesystem they use, because that's not information the user should even need to know, let alone have to reprogram their machine to understand them. Which is of course the core problem here. Answer the questions if you can.
I don't; I just find your attitude tiresome. Very well. Edit with answers incoming - not that you actually care about the answers, but for others reading the thread it might prove elucidating. No, they haven't. A quick Google search would have answered this for you. Two reasons: Linux is great at being easy to modify, even at a low level (in this case, specifically thanks to File-systems in User SpacE, or FUSE, which lets you install support for new file system types without having to modify the kernel in any way); and it's a different method of distribution which doesn't trigger Microsoft's legal restrictions. Both could have been answered with a quick Google. Pardon? Those commands - not 'code' - don't add or remove any devices; they install some additional software. On newer Linux distributions, it's a single line - "sudo apt-get install exfat-fuse exfat-utils" on my Ubuntu 14.04 install - and, if you'd prefer, you can do it through the Aptitude graphical package manager or Ubuntu Software Centre (if using Ubuntu, obviously) so you don't need to type in a single command line. Care to show me how 'easy' it is to get read/write ext4 support working in Windows? Hint: a hell of a lot harder. To gain permissions to alter system-wide settings. Don't like it? Type "sudo -i" once at the start to switch the terminal to the root user. This, you might note, is the same as opening a Windows command prompt with administrative privileges - or have you never needed to do that? It's not a customary prefix to everything, Phil, as well you (hopefully, unless you're genuinely ignorant about the operating system you're supposedly trying to use) know. It's the equivalent to Windows' UAC - in fact, it's where Microsoft stole the idea from. You use it on commands that affect system-wide settings, such as installing new software. Commands that don't affect the entire system and all other users don't need it. See also: installing software on Windows, where you need to click OK on UAC, compared with running said software, where you don't. Why, Phil? Why you so cripplingly, tongue-chewingly stupid? But seriously, Phil: why?
Well, I tried googling on "ntfs linux legality" and got, as the first match, a Ubuntu forum thread from 2006 suggesting it isn't terribly reliable, which was my understanding anyway. And, ah, I tend to turn UAC off. Because it's so indescribably annoying. Like Linux permissions. It's my damn PC, do as you're told!
Then have I got a mind-blowing trick for you: set a password on the root account ("sudo -i" followed by "passwd" - it's quicker than telling you exactly where to click to do it through the GUI) and you can log in as root. That way, you'll never have to type "sudo" ever again! But seriously, don't do that. The enhanced security of running as an unprivileged user is one of the strong points of modern operating systems, and logging in as root just to save four (okay, five including the space character) key presses on the odd occasion you actually need administrative permissions is a terrible idea. Still waiting for you to tell me how easy it is to get ext4 support in Windows, by the way.
Haven't the faintest clue - I've never needed to do it. What's your point? Why, when they condition you to prefix everything with "sudo" anyway?
I shoved an ext4 hard drive into my windows install just there. No error message. No acknowledgement of the drive.
My point, Phil, is this: You seeing my point, there, Phil? Except 'they' don't, Phil. And even if 'they' did - in the same way that 'they' condition you to press OK every time the Windows UAC prompt appears - it still provides a level of security. If I were browsing the web and a UAC prompt - or, in Linux, a sudo prompt - suddenly appeared when I wasn't doing anything, I'd likely get suspicious and hit Cancel. Et voila - I've just been protected from the latest drive-by zero-day. Huzzah! You may also notice that I said "modern operating systems", there, not "Linux" - the same concept is at the heart of Windows and OS X, and is as good a feature there as it is in Linux. Seriously, though: it's well established that, for reasons that are your own, you absolutely loathe Linux. Why, then, are you using it on your laptop? It can offer you no benefit. Install Windows and enjoy significantly lowered blood pressure.
I really like Linux, but it is different and you can't expect it to support everything windows does natively, as one wouldn't the other way round. If you are sooo frustrated by not being able to instantly access a disk that happens to use a file system that isn't free (or rather free enough) to be supported by Linux natively then maybe you'd be better off using the disks you have and going back to Windows 7. As mentioned above, I'd try to come to terms with using UAC/sudo for elevated privileges and not running as admin whichever way you go.
I must have been using Linux to long because that error message makes perfect sense to me lol As most have said its a pretty easy fix, just Google exfat Linux and there are a ton of guides on how to sort it Gareth relax dude ;-) Sent from my SM-T325 using Tapatalk
ext4 is anything but simple - it's a full blown journaled filesystem (like NTFS). Exfat is intended for situations where that sort of thing is too heavyweight. But I'll let you off that, because that isn't what's important. What's important is that exfat is what people are actually using for - for instance - cameras and audio recorders and other embedded flash devices. They aren't using ext4. Windows' support of ext4 is a non-issue because ext4 is barely used outside the experimental laboratory of open source - which is why I've never hit the issue. So, if Microsoft want a fee for exfat, fine, just bloody pay them! It'll be cents a copy! If there was a version of linux that didn't have these problems and cost what Windows does, I'd probably be using it! There is a deep-seated, absolutely fundamental misunderstanding at play here which, if anything, is what frustrates me about linux. Enormous amounts of work are being done by well-meaning and talented people but there's absolutely no understanding of what an operating system is actually for. The purpose of computers is to do work for people and this is - somehow - widely misunderstood. P
You can turn journalling off, y'know. One command. I have over 100 SD cards scattered around the place, in sizes ranging from 32MB to 64GB. D'you know how many are formatted as exFAT? I'll give you a clue: it's somewhere between zero and none. Fun fact: Samsung shipped 10 million Galaxy S5 smartphones in the first 25 days of it going on sale. Said smartphones run Linux - and support ext4 natively. In fact, let's take a look at market share: which operating system has the majority share of the desktop and laptop market? Right, Windows. Score one for your team. Now, which operating system has the majority share of the server market? High-performance computing? Smartphone and tablet? Embedded? Oooh, that'd be Linux, Linux, Linux, Linux and Linux. Suuuure it's an "experimental laboratory." Suuure. I thought you couldn't Google up any information about Microsoft's exFAT licensing requirements? How do you suddenly know how much it would cost? But why? What's wrong with Windows that you would want to switch to Linux - an operating system you consider "so cripplingly, tongue-chewingly stupid?" Are you a masochist? Is Windows fundamentally broken, that you would consider paying the same licensing fee for a rival operating system? I think they have a better understanding than you, Phil. I've been using Linux as my primary operating system for years now, and quite successfully - to the point where I'm self-employed and bringing in a decent enough wage to support my family as the sole breadwinner, all from within Linux. D'you know something else? I've typed "sudo" more times in this thread than I have in the last several months of using my Ubuntu-based desktop - despite having upgraded it from 13.10 to 14.04 in that time. As above: works for me. I'm a big believer in computers being a tool, not a lifestyle choice. I use Linux because it fits the way I work; if I were to use Windows instead, I would be less productive (and, given I write for several Linux publications, would need to spend a considerable time in a virtual machine anyway.) You use Windows because it fits the way you work - and that's great! There's absolutely nothing wrong with Windows. It's a perfectly usable operating system, enjoyed by millions world-wide. I'm secure enough in my enjoyment of Linux that I can say that, and not have to attack Windows for every imagined slight upon my person. Can you honestly say the same, Phil?
