[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Subject Index][Thread Index]

Re: RHL versions that support FAT.

To: linux-delhi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: RHL versions that support FAT.
From: jerry howell <jmhowell@xxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 02:23:27 -0500
In-reply-to: <00bd01c04c9b$b0ba11c0$316d36ca@kly>
References: <000801c04c35$8f4ade40$dcf15ecb@hom> <m3ofzl7f82.fsf@localhost.localdomain> <00bd01c04c9b$b0ba11c0$316d36ca@kly>
Reply-to: jmhowell@xxxxxxx

Actualy I acedentaly installed RH 6.1 onto a fat partition, it worked ok but 
was realy slugish. I wouldn't recomend it


On Sunday 12 November 2000 06:28, you wrote:
> I read somewhere that in the earlier stages of the RHL development it
> supported the FAT partition but then later that support was removed and now
> it's back there in the current release.
>
> Can anyone send me the real numbers, the versions that support FAT ?
>
> thanks
>
> regards,
> Bhummanjot S.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------
> The mailing list archives are available at
> http://lists.linux-india.org/cgi-bin/wilma/linux-delhi

Follow-Ups:
- Re: RHL versions that support FAT.
  - From: Bhummanjot S. Talwar

References:
- Weird Partition reading error in LArge HDD
  - From: Sandip Bhattacharya
- Re: Weird Partition reading error in LArge HDD
  - From: Lokesh Setia
- RHL versions that support FAT.
  - From: Bhummanjot S. Talwar

Prev by Subject: RHL versions that support FAT.
Next by Subject: Re: RHL versions that support FAT.
Previous by thread: RHL versions that support FAT.
Next by thread: Re: RHL versions that support FAT.
Index(es):
- Subject
- Thread