A. You're a typical HP Stream owner with a permanent 32GB C: drive
B. So you've added a 64GB portable memory card as the D: drive
C. But then you need to double the D: drive (to 128GB, which costs ~$10)
Does the same trick of formatting the volume name work in that scenario?
Marion wrote:
A. You're a typical HP Stream owner with a permanent 32GB C: drive
B. So you've added a 64GB portable memory card as the D: drive
C. But then you need to double the D: drive (to 128GB, which costs ~$10)
Does the same trick of formatting the volume name work in that scenario?
I would expect that as long as the laptop sees the new SD card as D:\
drive, nothing will really care ...
very good at dreaming up non-problems
On Fri, 31 Jan 2025 19:26:54 -0000 (UTC), Kenny McCormack wrote :
very good at dreaming up non-problems
The main point of this thread was to purposefully helpfully inform people
of the rather useful approach of formatting the volume label of sd cards.
I have tested two scenarios, both of which work perfectly when you change
out the sd card - but only if you've matched their respective volume labels 1. When you move from phone a to phone b where b is a clone of a, and,
2. When you double (or triple, or whatever) the size of the memory card.
Having said that the most important point in this thread is that...
I realize Kenny McCormack is a common troll, but the point that shouldn't
be lost when these trolls try to waste our time is that formatting the new
sd card with the same name as the old sd card is a rather useful approach.
For media, in general, it doesn't matter if you copied your old DCIM folder from your 64GB sd card to your new sd card, but for most modern editors (which can store files on the external portable memory card), it does
matter.
A classic example these ignorant trolls like Kenny McCormack don't
understand is the case of OSM map editors, which can store their *huge* map (and other associated KML, GPX, etc.) databases on the external sd card.
When you double the size of your portable memory, the existing installed editors such as OSMAnd~ don't even realize the card was swapped out on it.
Likewise for most modern editors. They still find their external files, but only if you've thought ahead by matching the entire filespec exactly.
Interestingly, what does seem to work even without matching the volume--
label, is "media files" tend to be found even when the volume label changes (which I suspect is due to a file-type tag that the operating system adds).
Does anyone have more detail on how that file-type tag works in the
specific case of switching from one filespec to another in the volume label when a typical user (who doesn't know the trick) inserts a new sd card?
On 2025-01-31 22:18, Marion wrote:
On Fri, 31 Jan 2025 19:26:54 -0000 (UTC), Kenny McCormack wrote :
very good at dreaming up non-problems
The main point of this thread was to purposefully helpfully inform people
of the rather useful approach of formatting the volume label of sd cards.
It would be clever if you used the label command instead of format :-p
It would be clever if you used the label command instead of format Efyc
Carlos E.R. wrote:
It would be clever if you used the label command instead of format
Are we discussing the label, or the volume ID?
Carlos E.R. wrote:
It would be clever if you used the label command instead of format Efyc
Are we discussing the label, or the volume ID?
On 2025-01-31 23:25, Andy Burns wrote:
Carlos E.R. wrote:
It would be clever if you used the label command instead of format
Are we discussing the label, or the volume ID?
He said label :-)
When it says Libby's Libby's Libby's on the label label label...
From: Kenny McCormack <gazelle@shell.xmission.com>
Newsgroups: alt.global-warming,alt.home.lawn.garden,alt.home.repair,sac.politics,talk.politics.guns
Subject: Besides being completely wrong on the facts, your logic sucks, too Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2024 13:31:24 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: The official candy of the new Millennium
Message-ID: <vf5l3c$3g545$1@news.xmission.com>
In article <WexmTqqSkCMaqmqkqLqPrxNUzmCylASM@news.usenet.farm>,
Jamaal Bowman <jamaal.bowman@dumpster-fire.guv> wrote:
...
The dictator Democrats keeping chanting "democracy" yet the hypocrite
overlords never allow We the People to decide for ourselves.
It is the Trumprepublicans who are the authoritarians, not the Democrats. Just look at Project 2025. Or any rational analysis of the American political parties and their stances.
But that aside, it is pretty clear that people like you simply should not
be allowed to make your own choices. You are a hazard to yourself and others. You probably voted for the Orange Monster (and probably more than once). That in and of itself shows you're not competent to be in the
voting booth. I'm serious about this; you are clearly voting against your own interests.
It would be clever if you used the label command instead of format 0a+0+c
Are we discussing the label, or the volume ID?
Are we discussing the label, or the volume ID?
He said label :-)
SD card terminology confuses people because there are at least 3 terms:
1. Volume ID (CID)
2. Volume Serial Number
3. Volume Name (aka Volume Label)
Some can be changed by the user and some can't be changed by the user.
But what matters is only what the software sees on the Android phone.
On Fri, 31 Jan 2025 23:39:47 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote :
Are we discussing the label, or the volume ID?
He said label :-)
Hi Carlos,
I love your suggestion because it allows us to always add more value.
As the entire point of being on Usenet is to learn & disseminate value.
SD card terminology confuses people because there are at least 3 terms:
1. Volume ID (CID)
2. Volume Serial Number
3. Volume Name (aka Volume Label)
Below is both a clever suggestion - and - a quizzical question.
Here's the problem set (which I experienced myself, recently):
A. You're a typical Android/Windows/editor owner with a 64GB sdcard
B. Most of your editing data is kept on that 64GB portable memory card
C. But then you need to double your memory (to 128GB, which costs ~$10)
What happens?
Well, for most people, they lose many editing associations to the files.
Why?
Because for many editors, they don't "search" for file associations.
Coupled with the filespec having changed between the 64GB & 128GB sd cards.
Huh?
You need to know that every sdcard comes with a "volume name".
An example volume name could be, for example, "A1B1-C1D1" (or whatever). Another example volume name could be, for example, "A2B2-C2D2".
The point is that every sdcard comes with an (almost) unique volume name.
So?
Well, the old card filespec to your data is now *different* than the new! OLD: /storage/A1B1-C1D1/{editors}/{files}
NEW: /storage/A2B2-C2D2/{editors}/{files}
OK. That sucks. [...]
(I probably shouldn't engage in this thread - and not only because it
got aggressive recently - because it seems (partly?) a Windows issue,
given the mention of 'C:', 'D:' and such crap later in this thread;
but I'm curious...)
(I probably shouldn't engage in this thread - and not only because it
got aggressive recently
- because it seems (partly?) a Windows issue,
given the mention of 'C:', 'D:'
and such crap later in this thread;
but I'm curious...)
First, the above mentioned IDs have a purpose, I think; to uniquely *identify* a hardware device.[*] (Please correct me if I'm wrong.) -
So it therefore sounds strange to change that ID in the first place.
And therefore it wouldn't appear to me to re-label that device and
even less to reformat the device just to change its "label".[**]
What I typically see as "solution" - but which is rather more of a
"concept" - is to use generic path components where you want them;
on Unix-like systems you'd create for example a symbolic link like
/storage/generic -> /storage/A2B2-C2D2
and generally access the files only through the generic link
/storage/generic/{editors}/{files}
If you want to replace the storage device just re-link the generic
link to the new device (and without any necessity to change device
identity).
(I'm not sure this is "clever" or "helpful" (as your suggestion is,
according to your subject), but it appears much more sensible to me.
Isn't that possible on Windows and Android to preserve portability?)
[*] I, and the OS, should actually have an interest to know whether
there's another (or new) device in the system.
[**] A quick browse of the Net shows that you could [on Windows] also
just simply change that label by context menu 'properties'.
Take into account, my first Android device (Nexus1) had a microSD slot, which it certainly needed due to only having 512MB of onboard flash and 512MB of RAM, so plenty of swapfile and moving parts of the system to SD
... but no phone I've owned since then has had a card slot.
<https://i.postimg.cc/Xq5SpS4D/tmopromo02.jpg>
So, for about $30, I can double the memory of every Android in the house!
You can't do *any* of that, right?
SD card terminology confuses people because there are at least 3 terms:
1. Volume ID (CID)
2. Volume Serial Number
3. Volume Name (aka Volume Label)
You can change them in Linux.
Going from memory, one of them you change in the partitioner (fdisk).
This one was crucial with Windows 7 because M$ would use it to detect machine change or pirated copy.
All these changes can be done without formatting and losing the content.
On Sat, 1 Feb 2025 14:55:50 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote :
SD card terminology confuses people because there are at least 3 terms:
1. Volume ID (CID)
2. Volume Serial Number
3. Volume Name (aka Volume Label)
You can change them in Linux.
Going from memory, one of them you change in the partitioner (fdisk).
This one was crucial with Windows 7 because M$ would use it to detect
machine change or pirated copy.
All these changes can be done without formatting and losing the content.
Hi Carlos,
You bring up a good point that I did a bad job of explaining the problem
set (& hence, in your appreciation of the sheer elegance of the solution).
Mea culpa.
I apologize.
It's (almost certainly) my fault that you & Andy (& perhaps many others)
are (apparently) confused about sd card use & terminology; specifically,
the reason why one would benefit by changing the Volume Name (aka Label).
For sdcards, portable memory is not the same thing as portable storage.
Hence, from this moment, I'll STOP using the word "memory" in terms of sd card terminology as I will use the more apt term of "storage" for sd cards.
That is, portable memory is not at all the same thing as portable storage. And it's MY FAULT for muddying up the waters on that distinction.
Hopefully my prior response to Andy will clear up that I am only discussing here how to *seamlessly* double (or triple or quadruple or whatever) your Android portable mem... ah, er, um "storage" (for only about ten bucks).
Note: I get all my sd cards for free off of Amazon Vine; but most people
have to pay for their stuff on Amazon, so I'm assuming it costs them $10.
Please be acutely aware of the fact that the elegance isn't in doubling or tripling your storage. The elegance is in the word "*seamless*".
The editor has no clue that you just swapped out the sd card to a new one! But, of course, the editor has to prior be aware of storage on the sd card.
That is, all your modern editors (which is why I stressed the word "modern" in the original post) "should" be able to find their files on your portable memory sd card where, if you use this insightful trick, they won't even
know that you just doubled the sd storage space that the editors have
access to.
I feel sorry for people who don't have Android phones with sd card slots. Because if they want to double their portable storage, they can't.
It's impossible (without adding hardware that sticks out of the phone).
Hence, I already explained to Andy (where lurkers can benefit) that there
is no way (that I know of) for *him* to double his portable memory (for ten bucks anyway). But most Android phones still have sd card slots (AFAIK).
Now that we have the concept of "portable storage" clarified, let's look at what people are confused about in the three typical sd card identifiers.
Why would we want to control the value of *any* of these?
1. Volume ID (CID)
2. Volume Serial Number
3. Volume Name (aka Volume Label)
Ignoring that the Volume ID is not changeable by the user, and hence has no value to us in controlling how Android editors find their sd card files...
To your point of being easily able to change the other two using Windows
(or Linux), why would you want to change the Volume Serial Number?
Is there some value that you see in doing that which I don't yet comprehend which makes doing so of value in terms of controlling Android file editors?
Remember, the whole point is that a simple elegant trick on Windows (or Linux) done years ahead of time, makes it seamless to double (or triple)--
the sd portable storage that is available to your modern Android editors.
If a symlink will work on non-root Android, then that's the Holy Grail. CHANGE FROM: /storage/sdcard1/ABCD-ABCD/{my editor's folders & files)
CHANGE TO: /storage/sdcard1/symlink/{my editor's folders & files)
or perhaps... CHANGE TO: /storage/symlink/{my editor's folders & files)
I have never been able to accomplish that illustrious glorious task.
Can you?
How?
[*] I, and the OS, should actually have an interest to know whether
there's another (or new) device in the system.
2. Volume Serial Number:
Format: A 32-bit number, usually displayed as 8 hexadecimal
characters
(e.g., A1B2C3D4).
How it's assigned: Generated when the SD card is formatted. It can
change if you reformat the card.
1. Volume ID (CID)
2. Volume Serial Number
3. Volume Name (aka Volume Label)
You can change them in Linux.
Also I *never* edit a file residing in flash storage.
The editor has no clue that you just swapped out the sd card to a new one! >> But, of course, the editor has to prior be aware of storage on the sd card.
I don't use editors on phone nor tablet.
And, my editor by default inserts photos inside the document file.
I can
link to external photos, but then, as I use Linux, I would use relative paths or symlinks.
Also I *never* edit a file residing in flash storage. I edit in main
storage in the computer, then copy the result over to flash media if needed.
I feel sorry for people who don't have Android phones with sd card slots.
Because if they want to double their portable storage, they can't.
I haven't had that need in over a decade.
Ignoring that the Volume ID is not changeable by the user, and hence has no >> value to us in controlling how Android editors find their sd card files... >> To your point of being easily able to change the other two using Windows
(or Linux), why would you want to change the Volume Serial Number?
Is there some value that you see in doing that which I don't yet comprehend >> which makes doing so of value in terms of controlling Android file editors?
Fooling Windows into thinking you have not changed computer. Windows
used that value for finding pirated copies.
Also you need to write those values when cloning hard disks (or flash media).
Storage cards are formatted the same as a hard disk. They contain
partition tables, and all the identifiers of a hard disk and the
partitions inside. And all the tools Windows or Linux have available for hard disks will work on them.
So media (such as images & video) I think is a special case in this regard.
... free cartoonify editors, in particular, seem to
be vastly more powerful on phones than they are on any desktop I've ever used.
On Sat, 1 Feb 2025 20:54:19 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:
Also I *never* edit a file residing in flash storage.
Does your system not have an SSD?
On Sat, 1 Feb 2025 14:55:50 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:
1. Volume ID (CID)
2. Volume Serial Number
3. Volume Name (aka Volume Label)
You can change them in Linux.
Not the first one, though, if thatrCOs wired into the hardware.
On Sat, 1 Feb 2025 20:54:19 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote :
The editor has no clue that you just swapped out the sd card to a new
one!
But, of course, the editor has to prior be aware of storage on the sd
card.
I don't use editors on phone nor tablet.
Hi Carlos,
If you don't ever use editors on a mobile device, then that's unusual.
Most people experience using editors on a mobile device, even if you don't.
But I find it hard to believe you don't use editors on a mobile device.
You don't use offline maps for example? Really? Seriously?
How do you navigate using your phone when there is no Internet signal?
Offline map editors are just one type of editor on an Android phone.
I, for one, do a lot of editing on an Android phone.
Another editor is Keepass2Android. There are plenty of Android editors.
Most (if not almost all) my private data is stored on the sd card.
And, my editor by default inserts photos inside the document file.
Photo editors are a different breed of app when it comes to "finding" their files. I'm not sure *how* media is handled differently than, oh, say, text files such as GPX files or PDF files or whatever - but there is some
"magic" on a phone that seems to find all media, no matter where it is.
So media (such as images & video) I think is a special case in this regard.
That is, even if you changed the volume name (aka volume label) of your sd card, the image & video editors still seem to *find* the sd card files.
If those on this newsgroup can edify us as to why that magic only works for media files, and not for, oh, say, text files (such as GPX files), please elucidate why other formats (such as PDF, gpx, kml, etc.) aren't easily found.
I can link to external photos, but then, as I use Linux, I would use
relative paths or symlinks.
I love your suggestion of symlinks, but as I painstakingly explained,
nobody yet has proposed a way to do it that I know of, for Android.
If you can get symlinks to work on the sdcard for Android, you'd be a far more intelligent man than I am, so I'll patiently await how you do it.
Also I *never* edit a file residing in flash storage. I edit in main
storage in the computer, then copy the result over to flash media if
needed.
Hmm... how do you edit GPX or KML files?
Do you copy them from the sd storage to main storage just to edit them?
Why?
I feel sorry for people who don't have Android phones with sd card
slots.
Because if they want to double their portable storage, they can't.
I haven't had that need in over a decade.
Hmm. If you have never done it, and if all your suggestions can't possibly work, why are you making those suggestions which have no hope of working?
Ignoring that the Volume ID is not changeable by the user, and hence
has no
value to us in controlling how Android editors find their sd card
files...
To your point of being easily able to change the other two using Windows >>> (or Linux), why would you want to change the Volume Serial Number?
Is there some value that you see in doing that which I don't yet
comprehend
which makes doing so of value in terms of controlling Android file
editors?
Fooling Windows into thinking you have not changed computer. Windows
used that value for finding pirated copies.
Hmm... you seem to be completely unaware of what the problem set is.
The problem set is fooling Android. Specifically editors. By using Windows.
Also you need to write those values when cloning hard disks (or flash
media).
Huh? Nobody is suggesting cloning. This solution only requires copying.
Cloning, e.g., using dd, is a completely different issue altogether:
sudo dd if=/dev/source_disk of=/dev/destination_disk bs=4M status=progress
Storage cards are formatted the same as a hard disk. They contain
partition tables, and all the identifiers of a hard disk and the
partitions inside. And all the tools Windows or Linux have available
for hard disks will work on them.
Again, I love your suggestion of symlinks, which is the first thing anyone would think of, but if you can get symlinks to work on non-rooted Android
for the sdcard, then you're a far more intelligent man than I am.
Please let us know how you accomplished tasks which you keep suggesting.
In article <vnletd$5l96$1@dont-email.me>,
Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> wrote:
...
(I probably shouldn't engage in this thread - and not only because it
got aggressive recently - because it seems (partly?) a Windows issue,
given the mention of 'C:', 'D:' and such crap later in this thread;
but I'm curious...)
Calling drive letters "crap" isn't "aggressive" ?
Anyway, given that this is a cross-posted thread, it would be useful to
know from which group you are reading/responding. I often give this info myself when responding to cross-posts.
My guess it that, like me, you are reading in comp.editors. The point of this observation is that this thread (whatever it does eventually turn out
to really be about) is really more of an Android/Windows thing, and is only tangentially related to editors. If you're coming from a primarily Unix (aka, Linux) background, a lot of it will look weird. I don't understand
it myself, but I am inferring (just from reading this thread) that there
are weirdnesses in both Android and Windows that give rise to the issues
that Arlen is trying to address.
Neither you nor I are familiar with these weirdnesses and problems, because we both come primarily from Unix/Linux backgrounds - where such things
simply don't exist.
[...]
[symbolic links]
This was brought up prior, I think by Carlos if I remember correctly,
where
I restrained myself from incredulously asking HOW he proposed to do that symlinking on Android such that the all-important Android file editors
would still recognize a path that has completely changed out from under
them.
To be clear, I'm absolutely and emphatically NOT saying it can't be
done; nor am I even intimating that it's not a great idea - I'm only
asking, eyes
wide open with intrigue, HOW you (and Carlos) would accomplish that.
[...]
On 01.02.2025 17:29, Kenny McCormack wrote:
In article <vnletd$5l96$1@dont-email.me>,
Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> wrote:
...
(I probably shouldn't engage in this thread - and not only because it
got aggressive recently - because it seems (partly?) a Windows issue,
given the mention of 'C:', 'D:' and such crap later in this thread;
but I'm curious...)
Calling drive letters "crap" isn't "aggressive" ?
I wouldn't think so, but maybe we have a different view on that. What I
meant and was addressing was the _ad hominem_ aggressivity. (It wouldn't
have occurred to me that calling a technical mis-design "crap" would be considered aggressive.)
I think that personal "Die fucking troll, Die."
[from "Quincy the fifth"] is something vastly different than "Feature
C: D: is crap."
Anyway, given that this is a cross-posted thread, it would be useful to
know from which group you are reading/responding. I often give this info
myself when responding to cross-posts.
My guess it that, like me, you are reading in comp.editors. The point of
this observation is that this thread (whatever it does eventually turn out >> to really be about) is really more of an Android/Windows thing, and is only >> tangentially related to editors. If you're coming from a primarily Unix
(aka, Linux) background, a lot of it will look weird. I don't understand
it myself, but I am inferring (just from reading this thread) that there
are weirdnesses in both Android and Windows that give rise to the issues
that Arlen is trying to address.
Neither you nor I are familiar with these weirdnesses and problems, because >> we both come primarily from Unix/Linux backgrounds - where such things
simply don't exist.
Well, I worked in the past also in DOS and Windows environments. And I
seem to recall that there were some sorts/variant of "links" available
(but I might be misremembering). And Android is a Linux (Unix) based OS
so I'd expect that such primitive and basic mechanisms are nor removed
from this OS. But I don't know; so if it's not applicable readers may
just dismiss my hint.
Calling drive letters "crap" isn't "aggressive" ?
I wouldn't think so, but maybe we have a different view on that. What I
meant and was addressing was the _ad hominem_ aggressivity. (It wouldn't
have occurred to me that calling a technical mis-design "crap" would be >considered aggressive.)
I think that personal "Die fucking troll, Die."
[from "Quincy the fifth"] is something vastly different than "Feature
C: D: is crap."
Well, I worked in the past also in DOS and Windows environments.
And I seem to recall that there were some sorts/variant of "links"
available (but I might be misremembering).
And Android is a Linux (Unix) based OS
so I'd expect that such primitive and basic mechanisms are nor removed
from this OS. But I don't know; so if it's not applicable readers may
just dismiss my hint.
On 2025-02-02 15:24, Janis Papanagnou wrote:
On 01.02.2025 17:29, Kenny McCormack wrote:
In article <vnletd$5l96$1@dont-email.me>,
Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> wrote:
...
(I probably shouldn't engage in this thread - and not only because it
got aggressive recently - because it seems (partly?) a Windows issue,
given the mention of 'C:', 'D:' and such crap later in this thread;
but I'm curious...)
Calling drive letters "crap" isn't "aggressive" ?
I wouldn't think so, but maybe we have a different view on that. What I
meant and was addressing was the _ad hominem_ aggressivity. (It wouldn't
have occurred to me that calling a technical mis-design "crap" would be
considered aggressive.)
Some people do. I was called to attention and maybe banned from a Linux
forum for such an opinion. I assume because developers and packagers are
part of the community, and calling a software crap is insulting the
developer who might be reading and is working gratis.
[...]
Android is *nix based, yes, but uses an MsDOS filesystem (FAT).
On 02.02.2025 15:50, Carlos E.R. wrote:[...]
Android is *nix based, yes, but uses an MsDOS filesystem (FAT).
Yes, I know. For some reasons inferiors concepts are invented and
they also don't die once they've got widely spread.
Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 02.02.2025 15:50, Carlos E.R. wrote:[...]
Android is *nix based, yes, but uses an MsDOS filesystem (FAT).
Yes, I know. For some reasons inferiors concepts are invented and
they also don't die once they've got widely spread.
To be clear, Android's native filesystem is not FAT (but ext4), but if
you use a (Micro)SD-card in an Android device (which is partly the
subject of this ... ahem ... 'thread'), then the filesystem on that card
is FAT (assuming it's not used as an extension of Internal Storage
('disk' space)).
... free cartoonify editors, in particular, seem to
be vastly more powerful on phones than they are on any desktop I've ever
used.
Anything as powerful as this <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hzqD4xcbEuE>?
Ok, now that I understand what type of editor you are talking about and
the scenario,
I can agree that changing the label of the card is the thing to do.
It is a particular scenario.
Then, remember that you can just edit the label to anything without formatting, in Windows. There is a "label" command in MsDOS that should still be able to do the trick.
That said, it happens that I can not quadruple the storage in my tablet, because the maximum size it accepts is not that large.
You don't use offline maps for example? Really? Seriously?
How do you navigate using your phone when there is no Internet signal?
Till today I had no idea you were talking of map editors. I was thinking text editors.
No, I do not use map editors on my phone, either.
I use map apps that view the map, not edit them.
Another editor is Keepass2Android. There are plenty of Android editors.
Most (if not almost all) my private data is stored on the sd card.
I don't "edit" my password file on the phone.
And, my editor by default inserts photos inside the document file.
Photo editors are a different breed of app when it comes to "finding" their >> files. I'm not sure *how* media is handled differently than, oh, say, text >> files such as GPX files or PDF files or whatever - but there is some
"magic" on a phone that seems to find all media, no matter where it is.
So media (such as images & video) I think is a special case in this regard. >>
That is, even if you changed the volume name (aka volume label) of your sd >> card, the image & video editors still seem to *find* the sd card files.
If those on this newsgroup can edify us as to why that magic only works for >> media files, and not for, oh, say, text files (such as GPX files), please
elucidate why other formats (such as PDF, gpx, kml, etc.) aren't easily
found.
Because "editor" to me is a text editor, and I was thinking of the one I use, Libre Office Writer. Ok, a word processor. If I have to edit pure
plain text files they are just a few kilobytes in size.
I can link to external photos, but then, as I use Linux, I would use
relative paths or symlinks.
I love your suggestion of symlinks, but as I painstakingly explained,
nobody yet has proposed a way to do it that I know of, for Android.
Your question is posted to the editors group, and to the windows group,
so I don't have to limit my thinking to Android.
If you can get symlinks to work on the sdcard for Android, you'd be a far
more intelligent man than I am, so I'll patiently await how you do it.
Also I *never* edit a file residing in flash storage. I edit in main
storage in the computer, then copy the result over to flash media if
needed.
Hmm... how do you edit GPX or KML files?
I don't.
I thought you were talking of text files.
Do you copy them from the sd storage to main storage just to edit them?
Why?
Because the wear in flash cards is limited, and using an editor in such media stresses them.
As I recall, Blender was extremely powerful; but I was looking at it for
3D CAD purposes ...
On 2025-02-02 04:21, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Sat, 1 Feb 2025 20:54:19 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:
Also I *never* edit a file residing in flash storage.
Does your system not have an SSD?
Mmm. Certainly, but it is another kind, designed for intensive use.
On Sun, 2 Feb 2025 14:43:10 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2025-02-02 04:21, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Sat, 1 Feb 2025 20:54:19 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:
Also I *never* edit a file residing in flash storage.
Does your system not have an SSD?
Mmm. Certainly, but it is another kind, designed for intensive use.
You didnrCOt say which kind.
On Sun, 2 Feb 2025 15:07:34 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote :
I use map apps that view the map, not edit them.
Well, that's understandable, but even if you never *edit* the maps, you
still have to store offline maps *somewhere*, where, they're never small.
Do you copy them from the sd storage to main storage just to edit them?
Why?
Because the wear in flash cards is limited, and using an editor in
such media stresses them.
Hmm... I get what you are saying, but I've never worried about the wear of sdcards. I'm sure it happens. But how much does it happen?-a I don't know. <https://duckduckgo.com/?q=how+long+do+sdcards+really+last>
Anything I don't know, I look up, so here's what I found just now.
-aFactors influencing SD card wear:
-aa. Frequency of writes
-ab. Amount of data written -ac. Quality of the card
-ad. Wear leveling
-ae. Environmental factors (e.g., temperature & physical damage)
That having been said, this guesstimates about a 10-year life for sdcards: <https://www.howtogeek.com/887545/how-long-do-sd-cards-last/>
Interestingly, one recommendation that article above makes is:
-af. Avoid filling it to capacity
Interesting value added, is it not?
Thanks for bringing up the type of editors being important, as I learned a lot simply by responding to your valid concerns. Much appreciated!
Because "editor" to me is a text editor ...
Flash media, ie, usb sticks or storage cards, do not have wear
levelling. Ok, maybe some units out there do, but mere mortals don't
have them. SSDs do.
On 2025-02-03 01:01, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Sun, 2 Feb 2025 14:43:10 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2025-02-02 04:21, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Sat, 1 Feb 2025 20:54:19 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:
Also I *never* edit a file residing in flash storage.
Does your system not have an SSD?
Mmm. Certainly, but it is another kind, designed for intensive use.
You didnrCOt say which kind.
I don't call an SSD a flash media.
In article <vnoa2f.qag.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net>,
Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 02.02.2025 15:50, Carlos E.R. wrote:[...]
Android is *nix based, yes, but uses an MsDOS filesystem (FAT).
Yes, I know. For some reasons inferiors concepts are invented and
they also don't die once they've got widely spread.
To be clear, Android's native filesystem is not FAT (but ext4), but if
you use a (Micro)SD-card in an Android device (which is partly the
subject of this ... ahem ... 'thread'), then the filesystem on that card
is FAT (assuming it's not used as an extension of Internal Storage
('disk' space)).
Yes, all true. Interestingly, at least the one time I tested this, when I formatted an SD card to ext4, then inserted it into a phone, it did not recognize it. Odd, because obviously, it *can* recognized ext4
filesystems. But it only seems to be able to do FAT on the SD card.
As I recall, Blender was extremely powerful; but I was looking at it for
3D CAD purposes ...
It covers a lot of DCC application areas, as should be evident by now.
I use map apps that view the map, not edit them.
Well, that's understandable, but even if you never *edit* the maps, you
still have to store offline maps *somewhere*, where, they're never small.
I don't need to store the entire map of the USA, or the entire Europe either. Just Spain, Ontario, and Quebec, to be precise. Actually, I accidentally downloaded to my phone a lot of podcasts and they use more gigabytes than my maps.
You again stirred my curiosity - since I don't know about the Android
and its file-editors peculiarities... - How does Android recognize the
path with the (arbitrary) "A1B1-C1D1" and "A2B2-C2D2" path components
but not a generic (a fixed) one?
On 2025-02-03 01:01, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Sun, 2 Feb 2025 14:43:10 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2025-02-02 04:21, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Sat, 1 Feb 2025 20:54:19 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:
Also I *never* edit a file residing in flash storage.
Does your system not have an SSD?
Mmm. Certainly, but it is another kind, designed for intensive use.
You didnrCOt say which kind.
I don't call an SSD a flash media.
I don't call an SSD a flash media.
Why not? SSD *is* flash storage. Just because there is a controller
which takes care of wear leveling, the storage technology itself is not >different to that of SD cards.
In article <m0br40Ff8v9U2@mid.individual.net>,
Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
...
I don't call an SSD a flash media.
Why not? SSD *is* flash storage. Just because there is a controller
which takes care of wear leveling, the storage technology itself is not
different to that of SD cards.
Chill out, man.
People often use terminology in idiosyncratic ways. That doesn't make them wrong. I understand Carlo's frame of reference, and I accept it. You
should do likewise.
Just for one example:
In some circles, unless it is a 4 footed mammal, it is not an "animal".
I assume Carlo's use of terminology is similar.
On Sun, 2 Feb 2025 15:44:38 +0100, Janis Papanagnou wrote :
You again stirred my curiosity - since I don't know about the Android
and its file-editors peculiarities... - How does Android recognize the
path with the (arbitrary) "A1B1-C1D1" and "A2B2-C2D2" path components
but not a generic (a fixed) one?
Well, I wish I understood why *some* Android file managers show those
cryptic identifiers, and yet other Android file managers show '0000-0001'.
There must be someone out there who understands why, but it's not me (yet).
Take a look at these screenshots I made for you to illustrate the question.
0. We're starting with an sdcard which was formatted to 0000-0001
-a Then we test only the 1st 4 file managers in my homescreen "file' folder
-a <https://i.postimg.cc/HszHTvkZ/label.jpg>
2. Notice the first file manager (OwlFiles) shows both the cryptic label
-a and the user-defined label (for reasons completely unknown to me).
-a <https://i.postimg.cc/PqGS9TnB/owlfiles.jpg>
3. The second file manager (Round Sync) is completely fooled by the label!
-a <https://i.postimg.cc/C1rkysfz/roundsync.jpg>
4. The third file manager (Mix Explorer) is almost completely fooled.
-a <https://i.postimg.cc/26yLxLXm/mixexplorer.jpg>
5. The fourth file manager (ZArchiver) isn't fooled in the least.
-a <https://i.postimg.cc/0yvf0ZGs/zarchiver.jpg>
I wish I understood those results.
But I don't.
Does anyone?
Why do some file managers show 0000-0001, while others show both, and yet, still others only show the cryptic volume label & not the 0000-0001?
I openly admit that I'm befuddled by those results.
Does someone know more about this than I do?
If so, please explain why we're seeing what we're seeing above.
That would add value for sure.
Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 02.02.2025 15:50, Carlos E.R. wrote:[...]
Android is *nix based, yes, but uses an MsDOS filesystem (FAT).
Yes, I know. For some reasons inferiors concepts are invented and
they also don't die once they've got widely spread.
To be clear, Android's native filesystem is not FAT (but ext4), but if
you use a (Micro)SD-card in an Android device (which is partly the
subject of this ... ahem ... 'thread'), then the filesystem on that card
is FAT (assuming it's not used as an extension of Internal Storage
('disk' space)).
On 2025-02-03 14:09, Kenny McCormack wrote:
In article <m0br40Ff8v9U2@mid.individual.net>,
Arno Welzel-a <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
...
I don't call an SSD a flash media.
Why not? SSD *is* flash storage. Just because there is a controller
which takes care of wear leveling, the storage technology itself is not
different to that of SD cards.
Chill out, man.
People often use terminology in idiosyncratic ways.-a That doesn't make
them
wrong.-a I understand Carlo's frame of reference, and I accept it.-a You
should do likewise.
Just for one example:
In some circles, unless it is a 4 footed mammal, it is not an "animal".
I assume Carlo's use of terminology is similar.
This minute, I do not know how to name SSDs. I'm confused.
On 02.02.2025 15:50, Carlos E.R. wrote:[snip]
Android is *nix based, yes, but uses an MsDOS filesystem (FAT).
Yes, I know. For some reasons inferiors concepts are invented and
they also don't die once they've got widely spread.
Janis
Because "editor" to me is a text editor ...
Emacs is an editor, and not just a text editor. I have successfully used
it to edit non-text files.
This minute, I do not know how to name SSDs. I'm confused.
On 2025-02-03 14:09, Kenny McCormack wrote:
In article <m0br40Ff8v9U2@mid.individual.net>,
Arno Welzel-a <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
...
I don't call an SSD a flash media.
Why not? SSD *is* flash storage. Just because there is a controller
which takes care of wear leveling, the storage technology itself is not
different to that of SD cards.
Chill out, man.
People often use terminology in idiosyncratic ways.-a That doesn't make them >> wrong.-a I understand Carlo's frame of reference, and I accept it.-a You
should do likewise.
Just for one example:
In some circles, unless it is a 4 footed mammal, it is not an "animal".
I assume Carlo's use of terminology is similar.
This minute, I do not know how to name SSDs. I'm confused.
Android is *nix based, yes, but uses an MsDOS filesystem (FAT).
On old phones, when connected to computer, the internal storage was
taken over directly by the computer, and it did appear to be FAT.
It's hard to stop momentum, sometimes. Windows refusing to switch to a different FS for external medium also doesn't help.
Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> wrote at 15:04 this Sunday (GMT):
On 02.02.2025 15:50, Carlos E.R. wrote:[snip]
Android is *nix based, yes, but uses an MsDOS filesystem (FAT).
Yes, I know. For some reasons inferiors concepts are invented and
they also don't die once they've got widely spread.
Janis
It's hard to stop momentum, sometimes. Windows refusing to switch to a different FS for external medium also doesn't help.
Hardware devices do not need to have a partition table.
On Mon, 3 Feb 2025 19:58:39 -0500, Paul wrote:
Hardware devices do not need to have a partition table.
This may be an OS-dependent thing. On Unix and Linux systems, I have had
no problem formatting an entire block device as a single volume with no partition table. Windows is a bit more picky.
Huh, the filemanager I use is Ghost Commander. Sorry, I can't find the official name. Setup/Aplications does not list it, Play Store does not
list it, but I have just run it. Unless it has been renamed to Total Commander.
Google finds a site:
https://sites.google.com/site/ghostcommander1/About
but I don't know if this site is faked.
On 2025-02-02 17:29, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 02.02.2025 15:50, Carlos E.R. wrote:[...]
Android is *nix based, yes, but uses an MsDOS filesystem (FAT).
Yes, I know. For some reasons inferiors concepts are invented and
they also don't die once they've got widely spread.
To be clear, Android's native filesystem is not FAT (but ext4), but if you use a (Micro)SD-card in an Android device (which is partly the
subject of this ... ahem ... 'thread'), then the filesystem on that card
is FAT (assuming it's not used as an extension of Internal Storage
('disk' space)).
Are you sure it is ext4?
On old phones, when connected to computer, the internal storage was
taken over directly by the computer, and it did appear to be FAT.
On Mon, 3 Feb 2025 15:14:13 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote :
Huh, the filemanager I use is Ghost Commander. Sorry, I can't find the
official name. Setup/Aplications does not list it, Play Store does not
list it, but I have just run it. Unless it has been renamed to Total
Commander.
Google finds a site:
https://sites.google.com/site/ghostcommander1/About
but I don't know if this site is faked.
Hi Carlos,
As you're aware, I've tested all the free Android file managers, such that I-a have both Total Commander & Ghost Commander installed. As I recall, Christian Ghisler wrote the former while the latter is open source stuff.
Since I scrape the Google Play Store repository anonymously (without
logging in) I can see that Total Commander still exists in the repo. <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details? id=com.ghisler.android.TotalCommander>
However, I do see that the Google Play version of Ghost Commander is gone. <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.ghostsq.commander>
But you can see from my screenshots I have Ghost Commander installed.
It sees *both* the Volume Name Windows formatted, plus the cryptic name. <https://i.postimg.cc/v8z1hhKn/ghostcommander.jpg>
BTW, my version of Ghost Commander is v1.62.3 and when I click on the Help from inside of that app, it takes me to that URL so it's legitimate. <https://sites.google.com/site/ghostcommander1/>
That same help inside the app says the source code is located here: <https://sourceforge.net/projects/ghostcommander/>
At that sourceforge site is a green "DOWNLOAD" button which goes to <https://sourceforge.net/projects/ghostcommander/files/latest/download>
That seemed to work when I tested it just now from Windows: <https://phoenixnap.dl.sourceforge.net/project/ghostcommander/Betas/ Ghost%20Commander%201.64.1b2.apk>
Name: Ghost Commander 1.64.1b2.apk
Size: 5005025 bytes (4887 KiB)
SHA256: B574F966938A74B9EBF9210E803DBF0856087C65DEF5E63543A120BC3A28B7B5
What I do NOT understand is why I see *both* the 0000-0001 that Windows formatted and a crytic AAAA-BBBB style identifier (which I can presume was the original label name).
How can there be two volume labels to the same sdcard in Android? <https://i.postimg.cc/v8z1hhKn/ghostcommander.jpg>--
On 2025-02-03 14:09, Kenny McCormack wrote:
In article <m0br40Ff8v9U2@mid.individual.net>,
Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
...
I don't call an SSD a flash media.
Why not? SSD *is* flash storage. Just because there is a controller
which takes care of wear leveling, the storage technology itself is not
different to that of SD cards.
Chill out, man.
People often use terminology in idiosyncratic ways. That doesn't make them wrong. I understand Carlo's frame of reference, and I accept it. You should do likewise.
Just for one example:
In some circles, unless it is a 4 footed mammal, it is not an "animal".
I assume Carlo's use of terminology is similar.
This minute, I do not know how to name SSDs. I'm confused.
BTW, my version of Ghost Commander is v1.62.3 and when I click on the Help >> from inside of that app, it takes me to that URL so it's legitimate.
<https://sites.google.com/site/ghostcommander1/>
I wondered, because it is full of things about the war in Ukraine.
Photos of the app are gone.
What I do NOT understand is why I see *both* the 0000-0001 that Windows
formatted and a crytic AAAA-BBBB style identifier (which I can presume was >> the original label name).
No, that's probably the UUID.
How can there be two volume labels to the same sdcard in Android?
<https://i.postimg.cc/v8z1hhKn/ghostcommander.jpg>
If an MBR has four partitions on it (as in MSDOS partitioning),
then the Windows mounter will mount all four partitions (as long as they
are Windows types, or, an IFS is installed in the OS to extend the capability). It's not clear, if a partition becomes un-selectable,
whether a "letter" can be assigned to a partition.
In some cases, even a RAW partition can have a letter assigned, but if
you do that and then access the letter in Windows, it will immediately request that you format the partition.
On Tue, 4 Feb 2025 00:24:32 -0500, Paul wrote:
If an MBR has four partitions on it (as in MSDOS partitioning),
then the Windows mounter will mount all four partitions (as long as they
are Windows types, or, an IFS is installed in the OS to extend the
capability). It's not clear, if a partition becomes un-selectable,
whether a "letter" can be assigned to a partition.
In some cases, even a RAW partition can have a letter assigned, but if
you do that and then access the letter in Windows, it will immediately
request that you format the partition.
There seems to be no clear distinction in Windows between the block >device/partition and the filesystem volume.
On Tue, 4 Feb 2025 13:22:53 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote :
BTW, my version of Ghost Commander is v1.62.3 and when I click on the
Help
from inside of that app, it takes me to that URL so it's legitimate.
<https://sites.google.com/site/ghostcommander1/>
I wondered, because it is full of things about the war in Ukraine.
Photos of the app are gone.
Hi Carlos,
Yes, I agree. It's funny looking. Both the URL & that political web page.
But you don't even need that page since the Sourceforge link has the APK. <https://sourceforge.net/projects/ghostcommander/files/latest/download>
What I do NOT understand is why I see *both* the 0000-0001 that Windows
formatted and a crytic AAAA-BBBB style identifier (which I can
presume was
the original label name).
No, that's probably the UUID.
Well, I have no idea what it is, but looking up the format of a UUID, apparently the Universally Unique Identifier is a 128-bit number.
UUIDs are typically displayed as a 36-character string, divided into five sections separated by hyphens, e.g., f43ca10b-68dc-4372-d567-0b02f2a3d48f
Maybe it's a shortened UUID, but it looks suspiciously like a default
volume name (aka volume label); but I didn't write down the original name.
The question would be how to list out the UUID on Android or Windows?
How can there be two volume labels to the same sdcard in Android?
<https://i.postimg.cc/v8z1hhKn/ghostcommander.jpg>
Googling, it seems sdcards don't have UUIDs anyway as they have the Card Identification (CID) register (which we've discussed prior in this thread).
That CID register is a 128-bit code includes the card serial number, manufacturer ID, and manufacturing date (plus a checksum).
CID Structure (128 bits total)
Manufacturer ID (MID): 8 bits - (e.g., SanDisk, Kingston)
OEM/Application ID (OID): 16 bits - OEM or application
Product Name (PNM): 5-character ASCII string for the product name
Product Revision (PRV): 8 bits for the product revision number
Product Serial Number (PSN): 32 bits - A unique serial number
Manufacturing Date (MDT): 12 bits - year & month of manufacture
CRC7 checksum: 7 bits - Used for error detection
Here is an example CID in hex that I found by searching for data.
03 53 44 53 55 30 34 47 10 0B 75 BC D0 23 8A
Here is what that manually translates into:
Manufacturer: SanDisk (MID: 0x03)
OEM/Application ID: SD (OID: 0x5344)
Product Name: SU04G (PNM: 0x5355303447)
Product Revision: 1.0 (PRV: 0x10)
Serial Number: 12345678 (PSN: 0x0B75BCD0)
Manufacturing Date: August 2023 (MDT: 0x238)
CRC7 Checksum:-a 10 in decimal (CRC: 0X67)
I think the number shown by Android is sufficiently different so as not to likely be the CID, but more likely to be the original Volume Label instead.
The problem is two fold, of course, in UNDERSTANDING what is going on.
a. Why didn't Windows sufficiently wipe out the old volume name?
b. Why do some Android apps display one, or the other, or both names?
Luckily, the $EDITORS on Android don't seem to have a problem using the Windows-assigned volume name (aka volume label); but it's an enigma.
The enigma to resolve is nobody (yet) seems to know how Windows works in terms of changing the volume name (aka volume label), least of all me; likewise, with Android that nobody (yet) knows why this is happening, least of all me. I hate when I don't understand something. That irks me a lot.
But it's likely there isn't an expert on this newsgroup who knows why.
I'll ask on the forums why Android file managers display two volume names. <https://i.postimg.cc/v8z1hhKn/ghostcommander.jpg>
Thanks for your help (and for the help of others who valiantly tried).
Android is *nix based, yes, but uses an MsDOS filesystem (FAT).
Yes, I know. For some reasons inferiors concepts are invented and
they also don't die once they've got widely spread.
To be clear, Android's native filesystem is not FAT (but ext4), but if
you use a (Micro)SD-card in an Android device (which is partly the
subject of this ... ahem ... 'thread'), then the filesystem on that card
is FAT (assuming it's not used as an extension of Internal Storage
('disk' space)).
Are you sure it is ext4?
On old phones, when connected to computer, the internal storage was
taken over directly by the computer, and it did appear to be FAT.
Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> wrote at 15:04 this Sunday (GMT):
On 02.02.2025 15:50, Carlos E.R. wrote:[snip]
Android is *nix based, yes, but uses an MsDOS filesystem (FAT).
Yes, I know. For some reasons inferiors concepts are invented and
they also don't die once they've got widely spread.
It's hard to stop momentum, sometimes. Windows refusing to switch to a different FS for external medium also doesn't help.
On 03.02.2025 20:00, candycanearter07 wrote:
Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> wrote at 15:04 this Sunday (GMT):
On 02.02.2025 15:50, Carlos E.R. wrote:[snip]
Android is *nix based, yes, but uses an MsDOS filesystem (FAT).
Yes, I know. For some reasons inferiors concepts are invented and
they also don't die once they've got widely spread.
It's hard to stop momentum, sometimes. Windows refusing to switch to a
different FS for external medium also doesn't help.
Given MS's FAT history I recall that I had been impressed about
MS's NTFS concept back these days. (It won't compare with ZFS or
other things we got, but for Windows standards it was very good.
I think they had borrowed concepts of NTFS from other vendors.)
WRT external media, that you focus on, there's yet more issues
than the file system; when I wanted some external file storage
system I recall I had bad experiences with the primitive (slow)
protocols regularly used between the device and the computer
(of course speaking about consumer-grade system configurations,
not professional ones).
Janis
If you're referring to protocols such as MTP (Media Transfer Protocol), that's an architectural disaster. Yes, it's slow. Nobody should be
hobbling electronics with crap like that! This should have been "killed
with fire" long ago.
Given MS's FAT history I recall that I had been impressed about MS's
NTFS concept back these days.
On Wed, 5 Feb 2025 02:24:01 +0100, Janis Papanagnou wrote:
Given MS's FAT history I recall that I had been impressed about MS's
NTFS concept back these days.
ItrCOs bad at dealing with lots of small files. Also itrCOs too monolithically
integrated into the Windows kernel. Windows lacks a Linux-style generic
VFS layer that can support a mix of different filesystems; everything is
too heavily centred around the specific capabilities of NTFS.
In article <m0br40Ff8v9U2@mid.individual.net>,
Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
...
I don't call an SSD a flash media.
Why not? SSD *is* flash storage. Just because there is a controller
which takes care of wear leveling, the storage technology itself is not
different to that of SD cards.
Chill out, man.
People often use terminology in idiosyncratic ways. That doesn't make them wrong. I understand Carlo's frame of reference, and I accept it. You
should do likewise.
On 2/3/2025 8:34 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
This minute, I do not know how to name SSDs. I'm confused.
Lawrence just spends his days trying to one-up other people,
especially with tech trivia. Why do you let him?
SSD is unambiguous. Like you, I
don't call it a flash drive. I don't call anything flash. There
are USB sticks, SSDs and SD cards. The type of data strorage
they use is not a practical concern. Those terms are specific
in terms of IDing the item.
On Sun, 2 Feb 2025 15:07:34 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:
Because "editor" to me is a text editor ...
Emacs is an editor, and not just a text editor. I have successfully used
it to edit non-text files.
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-03 04:01:
On Sun, 2 Feb 2025 15:07:34 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:
Because "editor" to me is a text editor ...
Emacs is an editor, and not just a text editor. I have successfully used
it to edit non-text files.
To be more precise: it is a text editor which can be extended to
interpret the syntax of text stored in a file - like Markdown. But you
can not edit videos or bitmap graphics with it, since it is still a
*text* based editor.
On 2025-02-05 10:30, Arno Welzel wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-03 04:01:<https://sachachua.com/blog/2025/01/editing-videos-with-emacs-and-subed-record-el/>
On Sun, 2 Feb 2025 15:07:34 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:
Because "editor" to me is a text editor ...
Emacs is an editor, and not just a text editor. I have successfully used >>> it to edit non-text files.
To be more precise: it is a text editor which can be extended to
interpret the syntax of text stored in a file - like Markdown. But you
can not edit videos or bitmap graphics with it, since it is still a
*text* based editor.
Editing videos with Emacs and subed-record.el
Jan 1, 2025| emacs, subed, video
<https://www.reddit.com/r/emacs/comments/2iqqaj/gneve_gnu_emacs_video_editor/>
GNEVE - GNU Emacs Video Editor
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0vumR5Hcz7s>
GNEVE - GNU Emacs Video Editor mode demo
Carlos E.R., 2025-02-05 11:31:
On 2025-02-05 10:30, Arno Welzel wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-03 04:01:<https://sachachua.com/blog/2025/01/editing-videos-with-emacs-and-subed-record-el/>
On Sun, 2 Feb 2025 15:07:34 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:
Because "editor" to me is a text editor ...
Emacs is an editor, and not just a text editor. I have successfully used >>>> it to edit non-text files.
To be more precise: it is a text editor which can be extended to
interpret the syntax of text stored in a file - like Markdown. But you
can not edit videos or bitmap graphics with it, since it is still a
*text* based editor.
Editing videos with Emacs and subed-record.el
Jan 1, 2025| emacs, subed, video
<https://www.reddit.com/r/emacs/comments/2iqqaj/gneve_gnu_emacs_video_editor/>
GNEVE - GNU Emacs Video Editor
It may be called this, but Emacs is not used to *edit* the video itself
but only to control other programs.
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0vumR5Hcz7s>
GNEVE - GNU Emacs Video Editor mode demo
As you can see - you still input *text* in Emacs and this will trigger *other* programs to do things.
Well - it was not about not calling SSD "flash media". The origin of
this discussion was this sentence by Carlos:
"Also I *never* edit a file residing in flash storage."
On Wed, 5 Feb 2025 02:24:01 +0100, Janis Papanagnou wrote:
Given MS's FAT history I recall that I had been impressed about MS's
NTFS concept back these days.
ItrCOs bad at dealing with lots of small files.
Also itrCOs too monolithically integrated into the Windows kernel.
Windows lacks a Linux-style generic
VFS layer that can support a mix of different filesystems;
everything is
too heavily centred around the specific capabilities of NTFS.
IFS stands for Installable File System. [...]
Windows has *lots* of features. Remember: 7000 developers work there.
It takes fifty sheets of typing paper, to explain the permissions system.
Carlos E.R., 2025-02-05 11:31:
On 2025-02-05 10:30, Arno Welzel wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-03 04:01:<[...]>
On Sun, 2 Feb 2025 15:07:34 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:
Because "editor" to me is a text editor ...
Emacs is an editor, and not just a text editor. I have successfully used >>>> it to edit non-text files.
To be more precise: it is a text editor which can be extended to
interpret the syntax of text stored in a file - like Markdown. But you
can not edit videos or bitmap graphics with it, since it is still a
*text* based editor.
Editing videos with Emacs and subed-record.el
Jan 1, 2025| emacs, subed, video
<[...]>
GNEVE - GNU Emacs Video Editor
It may be called this, but Emacs is not used to *edit* the video itself
but only to control other programs.
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0vumR5Hcz7s>
GNEVE - GNU Emacs Video Editor mode demo
As you can see - you still input *text* in Emacs and this will trigger *other* programs to do things.
On 05.02.2025 08:10, Paul wrote:
IFS stands for Installable File System. [...]
Windows has *lots* of features. Remember: 7000 developers work there.
It takes fifty sheets of typing paper, to explain the permissions system.
So you want to say that it was a mis-design?
Janis
On Mon, 3 Feb 2025 19:00:02 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:
It's hard to stop momentum, sometimes. Windows refusing to switch to a
different FS for external medium also doesn't help.
The problems are all with the inflexibility of Windows itself. Instead of having a pluggable VFS layer that is agnostic to different filesystem formats, Linux-style, too many of its filesystem features are specifically tied to one filesystem format, namely NTFS.
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote at 22:01 this Monday (GMT):
On Mon, 3 Feb 2025 19:00:02 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:
It's hard to stop momentum, sometimes. Windows refusing to switch to a
different FS for external medium also doesn't help.
The problems are all with the inflexibility of Windows itself. Instead of >> having a pluggable VFS layer that is agnostic to different filesystem
formats, Linux-style, too many of its filesystem features are specifically >> tied to one filesystem format, namely NTFS.
Yeah, and then making the OS reliant on those systems.
On 2/5/2025 4:25 AM, Arno Welzel wrote:
Well - it was not about not calling SSD "flash media". The origin of
this discussion was this sentence by Carlos:
"Also I *never* edit a file residing in flash storage."
-a And you didn't know he was talking about an external
stick or card? Lawrence was just trying to catch him in
-a"I know and you don't. Ha ha!"
-a It's getting to be ridiculous how many posts here are just
bickering that's kept going by compulsive arguers.
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-03 04:01:
On Sun, 2 Feb 2025 15:07:34 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:
Because "editor" to me is a text editor ...
Emacs is an editor, and not just a text editor. I have successfully
used it to edit non-text files.
To be more precise: it is a text editor which can be extended to
interpret the syntax of text stored in a file - like Markdown. But you
can not edit videos or bitmap graphics with it, since it is still a
*text* based editor.
... that's the reason why it is called "solid state disk" and not "flash media disk".
JFTR: In the past there were in fact SSDs based on RAM chips with
battery backup - for example the "memory cards" of some pocket computers
or programmable calculators.
On 05.02.2025 05:43, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Wed, 5 Feb 2025 02:24:01 +0100, Janis Papanagnou wrote:
Given MS's FAT history I recall that I had been impressed about MS's
NTFS concept back these days.
ItrCOs bad at dealing with lots of small files.
Maybe. I compared it just in the context of what was there before in
these more primitive OSes.
The equivalent of Linux FUSE, is Windows IFS.
One of the first popular instances, was EXT2IFS which I had installed on WinXP.
If you want impressive, look at WSL/WSL2/WSLg . From when the first GUI showed up (it was a bit glitchy) until it was running like today,
took... one week. This means they've hired some good people there.
There have been cases made by Microsoft, where in the documentation it
would claim a certain thing would only work on NTFS. And then an
external dev would turn around and make it work on FAT32.
As for "every feature", the audience here are mostly desktop users and
not server users. The server side has a few features we don't see here.
On Wed, 5 Feb 2025 10:18:28 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:
... that's the reason why it is called "solid state disk" and not "flash
media disk".
JFTR: In the past there were in fact SSDs based on RAM chips with
battery backup - for example the "memory cards" of some pocket computers
or programmable calculators.
But those were never called rCLsolid state disksrCY though, where they.
On Wed, 5 Feb 2025 02:10:53 -0500, Paul wrote:
The equivalent of Linux FUSE, is Windows IFS.
One of the first popular instances, was EXT2IFS which I had installed on
WinXP.
Do you have ext3 or ext4 support?
No? This IFS thing doesnrCOt seem to be used much.
wsl --helpCopyright (c) Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
On Wed, 2/5/2025 7:11 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
No? This IFS thing doesnrCOt seem to be used much.
The person who wrote that (EXT2IFS), didn't seem interested in
maintaining it forever.
It seemed more of a demo of IFS.
I don't know if source was released or not.
On Wed, 5 Feb 2025 20:59:05 -0500, Paul wrote:
On Wed, 2/5/2025 7:11 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
No? This IFS thing doesnrCOt seem to be used much.
The person who wrote that (EXT2IFS), didn't seem interested in
maintaining it forever.
It seemed more of a demo of IFS.
Was there anything that made serious use of it?
I don't know if source was released or not.
If it was, someone else could have maintained it. Open Source survives,
not on user popularity, but on contributions from an active community.
wmic diskdrive list briefCaption DeviceID Model Partitions Size
wsl --mount \\.\PHYSICALDRIVE1 --partition 7The disk was successfully mounted as '/mnt/wsl/PHYSICALDRIVE1p7'
bashdf # Boring bits removed (Ubuntu-specific SNAP mounts and so on)
On Wed, 5 Feb 2025 10:18:28 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:
... that's the reason why it is called "solid state disk" and not "flash
media disk".
JFTR: In the past there were in fact SSDs based on RAM chips with
battery backup - for example the "memory cards" of some pocket computers
or programmable calculators.
But those were never called rCLsolid state disksrCY though, where they.
<https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/manual/html_node/emacs/Editing-Binary-Files.html>
44 Editing Binary Files -|
There is a special major mode for editing binary files: Hexl mode. To
use it, use M-x hexl-find-file instead of C-x C-f to visit the file.
This command converts the filerCOs contents to hexadecimal and lets you
edit the translation. When you save the file, it is converted
automatically back to binary.
On Wed, 5 Feb 2025 10:30:23 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-03 04:01:
On Sun, 2 Feb 2025 15:07:34 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:
Because "editor" to me is a text editor ...
Emacs is an editor, and not just a text editor. I have successfully
used it to edit non-text files.
To be more precise: it is a text editor which can be extended to
interpret the syntax of text stored in a file - like Markdown. But you
can not edit videos or bitmap graphics with it, since it is still a
*text* based editor.
It can edit files containing arbitrary binary data.
On Wed, 5 Feb 2025 14:26:23 -0500, Paul wrote:
There have been cases made by Microsoft, where in the documentation it
would claim a certain thing would only work on NTFS. And then an
external dev would turn around and make it work on FAT32.
HererCOs one big one: every time I point out the old rCLMicrosoft thinks 26 drive letters ought to be enough for anybodyrCY limitation, someone tries to claim that Windows lets you use mount points instead of drive letters, *nix-style. But then it turns out that mount points are an NTFS-specific feature, that donrCOt work with other filesystems.
Meanwhile, the Android apps I had suggested are, um, er, shall we say
almost foolproof? All you do is pick a photo & you cartoonify it.
Takes mere seconds.
And no skills whatsoever.
As I said - you still edit *text*. There is just an automatic conversion
from binary to *text* and then back to binary. But the editor itself
still works on *text*.
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-06 00:14:
[Emacs] can edit files containing arbitrary binary data.
It can use extensions which convert binary data to text ...
I'm editing a text file from an EXT4 partition, using nothing but Microsoft-provided tools.
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-06 01:05:
On Wed, 5 Feb 2025 10:18:28 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:
... that's the reason why it is called "solid state disk" and not
"flash media disk".
JFTR: In the past there were in fact SSDs based on RAM chips with
battery backup - for example the "memory cards" of some pocket
computers or programmable calculators.
But those were never called rCLsolid state disksrCY though, where they.
Correct - "solid state drive" and not "solid state disk".
On Wed, 5 Feb 2025 22:48:55 -0500, Paul wrote:
I'm editing a text file from an EXT4 partition, using nothing but
Microsoft-provided tools.
And a whole Linux kernel. And you did mention bash, which is part of the
GNU app suite, is it not? So it seems like your Windows userland has no direct access to that Linux kernel.
Flash could last forever... if we could anneal it to repair defects in
the cells. But we're not there yet, and might never make it there.
On Thu, 2/6/2025 4:00 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Wed, 5 Feb 2025 22:48:55 -0500, Paul wrote:But I nevertheless, have access to EXT4, using nothing but
I'm editing a text file from an EXT4 partition, using nothing but
Microsoft-provided tools.
And a whole Linux kernel. And you did mention bash, which is part of
the GNU app suite, is it not? So it seems like your Windows userland
has no direct access to that Linux kernel.
Microsoft-provided software.
On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 20:21:14 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:
As I said - you still edit *text*. There is just an automatic conversion
from binary to *text* and then back to binary. But the editor itself
still works on *text*.
I have done direct editing of binary data in Emacs.
On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 16:20:21 -0500, Paul wrote:
On Thu, 2/6/2025 4:00 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Wed, 5 Feb 2025 22:48:55 -0500, Paul wrote:But I nevertheless, have access to EXT4, using nothing but
I'm editing a text file from an EXT4 partition, using nothing but
Microsoft-provided tools.
And a whole Linux kernel. And you did mention bash, which is part of
the GNU app suite, is it not? So it seems like your Windows userland
has no direct access to that Linux kernel.
Microsoft-provided software.
You mean you consider that Linux kernel and GNU app suite to be rCLMicrosoft-providedrCY? Even though Microsoft had little or nothing to do with the development of that software?
On 2025-02-06 21:57, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
I have done direct editing of binary data in Emacs.
And I have done so in MsDOS times with primitive text editors, just
because that was what I had. To change some string.
On Thu, 2/6/2025 5:42 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
You mean you consider that Linux kernel and GNU app suite to beIt's a containerized environment, which lacks substantial details.
rCLMicrosoft-providedrCY? Even though Microsoft had little or nothing to
do with the development of that software?
No, it's not out-of-the-box Linux.
On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 23:58:04 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2025-02-06 21:57, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
I have done direct editing of binary data in Emacs.
And I have done so in MsDOS times with primitive text editors, just
because that was what I had. To change some string.
Did they preserve null characters in the file?
On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 23:58:04 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2025-02-06 21:57, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
I have done direct editing of binary data in Emacs.
And I have done so in MsDOS times with primitive text editors, just
because that was what I had. To change some string.
Did they preserve null characters in the file?
On 07.02.2025 06:57, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 23:58:04 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2025-02-06 21:57, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
I have done direct editing of binary data in Emacs.
And I have done so in MsDOS times with primitive text editors, just
because that was what I had. To change some string.
Did they preserve null characters in the file?
Cannot tell for MS DOS environments, but why is that "binary" editing noteworthy in the first place? - Though I may be spoiled by using Vim
where you can of course also operate on files containing any control characters (including ASCII NUL).
The likely more interesting thing is probably to provide more advanced features in _dedicated_ hex editors. - I recall some tools where you
could edit either the hex values (on the left part of the screen) or
its string representation (on the right part of the screen).
On 2025-02-07 10:57, Janis Papanagnou wrote:
[...]
The likely more interesting thing is probably to provide more advanced
features in _dedicated_ hex editors. - I recall some tools where you
could edit either the hex values (on the left part of the screen) or
its string representation (on the right part of the screen).
Certainly. PC Tools on plain MsDOS did just that. Probably the Norton Utilities did too. What I don't remember doing is inserting a byte/char.
[...]
On 07.02.2025 11:44, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2025-02-07 10:57, Janis Papanagnou wrote:
[...]
The likely more interesting thing is probably to provide more advanced
features in _dedicated_ hex editors. - I recall some tools where you
could edit either the hex values (on the left part of the screen) or
its string representation (on the right part of the screen).
Certainly. PC Tools on plain MsDOS did just that. Probably the Norton
Utilities did too. What I don't remember doing is inserting a byte/char.
Good point. Inserting is just a normal operation in editors like Vim.
(And I don't remember that those dedicated hex-editors were capable
of that. OTOH, there were so many of these specific editors that I'd
also not be surprised if some supported that.) For certain data that
feature might be useful, but generally inserting/deleting of binary
data might likely just create an inconsistent data file.
But even domain-specific tailored "editors" seem to have issues with
data consistency.[*]
Janis
[*] I recall during the 1990's I had some tools for video processing
on a Windows computer; the tools were incapable of creating consistent results even when staying within the vendor's tools chest. Every single component seemed to do its job correctly on arbitrary data, but one of
their tool working on the output of another of their tools created just trash. It was a well known vendor, but it's name evades my memories.
On my complaints they had argued that the original data wasn't correct.
(That was of course the last time that I used their products at all.)
[...]
On Mon, 3 Feb 2025 15:42:50 -0500, Paul wrote:
Flash could last forever... if we could anneal it to repair defects in
the cells. But we're not there yet, and might never make it there.
Certainly the vendors of flash storage have no financial incentive to take us there.
On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 20:17:57 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-06 01:05:
On Wed, 5 Feb 2025 10:18:28 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:
... that's the reason why it is called "solid state disk" and not
"flash media disk".
JFTR: In the past there were in fact SSDs based on RAM chips with
battery backup - for example the "memory cards" of some pocket
computers or programmable calculators.
But those were never called rCLsolid state disksrCY though, where they.
Correct - "solid state drive" and not "solid state disk".
Neither.
On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 20:22:32 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-06 00:14:
[Emacs] can edit files containing arbitrary binary data.
It can use extensions which convert binary data to text ...
Without the help of such extensions.
The likely more interesting thing is probably to provide more advanced features in _dedicated_ hex editors.
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-06 21:57:
On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 20:22:32 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-06 00:14:
[Emacs] can edit files containing arbitrary binary data.
It can use extensions which convert binary data to text ...
Without the help of such extensions.
Yes, you can just open a file and edit it. If you are lucky, then the
file will not get corrupted by this.
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-06 22:02:
On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 20:17:57 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-06 01:05:
On Wed, 5 Feb 2025 10:18:28 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:Correct - "solid state drive" and not "solid state disk".
... that's the reason why it is called "solid state disk" and not
"flash media disk".
JFTR: In the past there were in fact SSDs based on RAM chips with
battery backup - for example the "memory cards" of some pocket
computers or programmable calculators.
But those were never called rCLsolid state disksrCY though, where they. >>>
Neither.
Well, you can ignore the real world, that's your choice.
Takes mere seconds.
And no skills whatsoever.
Give your users one button to push, they will all push that button. And
all produce the same result.
At some point the novelty wears off.
Until the product vendor comes up with a new button for you to push.
And maybe they start charging for some of those buttons, for the users who want an effect that isn't quite the same as those available on the
freeware version.
And now they have a revenue stream. And the users have gained no skills whatsoever, beyond the ability to push the offered buttons.
On Fri, 7 Feb 2025 21:47:34 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-06 22:02:
On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 20:17:57 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-06 01:05:
On Wed, 5 Feb 2025 10:18:28 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:Correct - "solid state drive" and not "solid state disk".
... that's the reason why it is called "solid state disk" and not
"flash media disk".
JFTR: In the past there were in fact SSDs based on RAM chips with
battery backup - for example the "memory cards" of some pocket
computers or programmable calculators.
But those were never called rCLsolid state disksrCY though, where they. >>>>
Neither.
Well, you can ignore the real world, that's your choice.
You have no idea how long the concept of non-volatile RAM has been around, do you?
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-08 04:28:
You have no idea how long the concept of non-volatile RAM has been
around, do you?
I have. I've been working in the IT business since the late 1980ies and
used RAM based solid-state drives as well ...
On Sat, 8 Feb 2025 10:18:22 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-08 04:28:
You have no idea how long the concept of non-volatile RAM has been
around, do you?
I have. I've been working in the IT business since the late 1980ies and
used RAM based solid-state drives as well ...
So you never used core memory.
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-09 00:35:
On Sat, 8 Feb 2025 10:18:22 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-08 04:28:
You have no idea how long the concept of non-volatile RAM has been
around, do you?
I have. I've been working in the IT business since the late 1980ies and
used RAM based solid-state drives as well ...
So you never used core memory.
Correct. But core memory is not intended as *persistent* memory, even
when it can be used this way.
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-09 00:35:
So you never used core memory.
Correct. But core memory is not intended as *persistent* memory, even
when it can be used this way.
On Mon, 10 Feb 2025 08:47:39 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-09 00:35:
So you never used core memory.
Correct. But core memory is not intended as *persistent* memory, even
when it can be used this way.
It was indeed regularly used that way. Consider that, on machines from the
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-11 02:00:
On Mon, 10 Feb 2025 08:47:39 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-09 00:35:
So you never used core memory.
Correct. But core memory is not intended as *persistent* memory, even
when it can be used this way.
It was indeed regularly used that way. Consider that, on machines from
the core memory era ...
Anyway - the memory was "RAM" and not "mass storage".
On Thu, 13 Feb 2025 19:59:35 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:
Anyway - the memory was "RAM" and not "mass storage".
Neither term was used back then.
Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> previously wrote:
Correct. But core memory is not intended as *persistent* memory, even
when it can be used this way.
I certainly didnrCOt use them in this context.
On Thu, 13 Feb 2025 19:59:35 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-11 02:00:
On Mon, 10 Feb 2025 08:47:39 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-09 00:35:
So you never used core memory.
Correct. But core memory is not intended as *persistent* memory, even
when it can be used this way.
It was indeed regularly used that way. Consider that, on machines from
the core memory era ...
Anyway - the memory was "RAM" and not "mass storage".
Neither term was used back then. I certainly didnrCOt use them in this context.
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-13 23:15:
On Thu, 13 Feb 2025 19:59:35 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-11 02:00:
On Mon, 10 Feb 2025 08:47:39 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-09 00:35:
So you never used core memory.
Correct. But core memory is not intended as *persistent* memory, even >>>>> when it can be used this way.
It was indeed regularly used that way. Consider that, on machines from >>>> the core memory era ...
Anyway - the memory was "RAM" and not "mass storage".
Neither term was used back then. I certainly didnrCOt use them in this
context.
It does not matter, if you use that term. I talk about the real world
usage.
And core memory is not *intended* to be non volatile storage ...
On Tue, 18 Feb 2025 11:56:41 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:[...]
And core memory is not *intended* to be non volatile storage ...
It did work that way, you know. By design.
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-13 23:15:
On Thu, 13 Feb 2025 19:59:35 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-11 02:00:
On Mon, 10 Feb 2025 08:47:39 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-09 00:35:
So you never used core memory.
Correct. But core memory is not intended as *persistent* memory, even >>>> when it can be used this way.
It was indeed regularly used that way. Consider that, on machines from >>> the core memory era ...
Anyway - the memory was "RAM" and not "mass storage".
Neither term was used back then. I certainly didn?t use them in this context.
It does not matter, if you use that term. I talk about the real world
usage. And core memory is not *intended* to be non volatile storage,
even if it is technically possible to keep information without powering
the memory.
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-18 22:55:
On Tue, 18 Feb 2025 11:56:41 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:[...]
And core memory is not *intended* to be non volatile storage ...
It did work that way, you know. By design.
Which is irrelevant for what I said.
On Fri, 21 Feb 2025 09:12:09 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-18 22:55:
On Tue, 18 Feb 2025 11:56:41 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:[...]
And core memory is not *intended* to be non volatile storage ...
It did work that way, you know. By design.
Which is irrelevant for what I said.
You said it wasnrCOt intended to be non-volatile. But it was.
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-22 00:35:
On Fri, 21 Feb 2025 09:12:09 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-18 22:55:
On Tue, 18 Feb 2025 11:56:41 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:[...]
And core memory is not *intended* to be non volatile storage ...
It did work that way, you know. By design.
Which is irrelevant for what I said.
You said it wasn?t intended to be non-volatile. But it was.
No, it wasn't. This was just the side-effect of using magnetic cores.
If
any other technology would have been as cheap and fast as core memory,
it would have been used.
As soon as *non-volatile* integrated circuits became cheaper, they
replaced core memory within a few years, because the proporty "non
volatile" was not the important thing. Instead having a lot of cheap RAM
was much more important - also when core memory was invented.
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-22 00:35:
On Fri, 21 Feb 2025 09:12:09 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-18 22:55:
On Tue, 18 Feb 2025 11:56:41 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:[...]
And core memory is not *intended* to be non volatile storage ...
It did work that way, you know. By design.
Which is irrelevant for what I said.
You said it wasnrCOt intended to be non-volatile. But it was.
No, it wasn't.
As soon as *non-volatile* integrated circuits became cheaper, they
replaced core memory within a few years ...
On Mon, 3 Feb 2025 15:16:42 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote :
Android is *nix based, yes, but uses an MsDOS filesystem (FAT).
Yes, I know. For some reasons inferiors concepts are invented and
they also don't die once they've got widely spread.
-a-a To be clear, Android's native filesystem is not FAT (but ext4),
but if
you use a (Micro)SD-card in an Android device (which is partly the
subject of this ... ahem ... 'thread'), then the filesystem on that card >>> is FAT (assuming it's not used as an extension of Internal Storage
('disk' space)).
Are you sure it is ext4?
On old phones, when connected to computer, the internal storage was
taken over directly by the computer, and it did appear to be FAT.
I just looked it up, and I'm more confused after doing so than before. <https://developer.android.com/training/data-storage>
The section on Data and file storage doesn't explicitly state "the" native Android file system, it implies that ext4 and f2fs are core to the system
due to their use in internal storage and system partitions.
That sounded good until I found descriptions of the kernel code, which ultimately dictates file system support but it requires technical expertise to make sense of - which I don't have. <https://www.google.com/search? q=https://source.android.com/docs/core/architecture/filesystems>
It seems maybe perhaps Android uses different file systems for different purposes (i.e., perhaps for system, data, cache, or external storage)???
I'm more confused now than before I looked it up, so if anyone can make
sense of those two references, please let the rest of us in on the secret.
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-22 00:35:
On Fri, 21 Feb 2025 09:12:09 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-18 22:55:
On Tue, 18 Feb 2025 11:56:41 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:[...]
And core memory is not *intended* to be non volatile storage ...
It did work that way, you know. By design.
Which is irrelevant for what I said.
You said it wasnrCOt intended to be non-volatile. But it was.
No, it wasn't. This was just the side-effect of using magnetic cores. If
any other technology would have been as cheap and fast as core memory,
it would have been used.
As soon as *non-volatile* integrated circuits became cheaper, they
replaced core memory within a few years, because the proporty "non--
volatile" was not the important thing. Instead having a lot of cheap RAM
was much more important - also when core memory was invented.
Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-22 00:35:
On Fri, 21 Feb 2025 09:12:09 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-18 22:55:
On Tue, 18 Feb 2025 11:56:41 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:[...]
And core memory is not *intended* to be non volatile storage ...
It did work that way, you know. By design.
Which is irrelevant for what I said.
You said it wasn?t intended to be non-volatile. But it was.
No, it wasn't. This was just the side-effect of using magnetic cores.
Sorry, but that's nonsense. I gave some examples from that era, where non-volatility was not a 'side-effect', but an essential property
without which the system(s) couldn't function,, especially in the
abscence of on-line mass-storage.
As soon as *non-volatile* integrated circuits became cheaper, they
replaced core memory within a few years, because the proporty "non
volatile" was not the important thing. Instead having a lot of cheap RAM
was much more important - also when core memory was invented.
I think you mean "*volatile* integrated circuits", otherwise the rest
of your comments do not make any sense. And indeed, after the second generation HP computers with core memory (2100), the third generation
(21MX) had volatile RAM with ICs.
On Tue, 25 Feb 2025 18:27:39 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-22 00:35:
On Fri, 21 Feb 2025 09:12:09 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-18 22:55:
On Tue, 18 Feb 2025 11:56:41 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:[...]
And core memory is not *intended* to be non volatile storage ...
It did work that way, you know. By design.
Which is irrelevant for what I said.
You said it wasnrCOt intended to be non-volatile. But it was.
No, it wasn't.
It was non-volatile. That is a matter of indisputable fact.
As soon as *non-volatile* integrated circuits became cheaper, they
replaced core memory within a few years ...
Why wait for *non-volatile* ones? If the non-volatility was not important, the replacement would have happened sooner.
[...][...]
Even machines with core memory still had some kind of external storage (punched tape, magnetic tape, drum memory etc.) because you still need
some kind of permanent storage even with core memory.
Frank Slootweg, 2025-02-25 19:25:
Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-22 00:35:
On Fri, 21 Feb 2025 09:12:09 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-18 22:55:
On Tue, 18 Feb 2025 11:56:41 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:[...]
And core memory is not *intended* to be non volatile storage ...
It did work that way, you know. By design.
Which is irrelevant for what I said.
You said it wasn?t intended to be non-volatile. But it was.
No, it wasn't. This was just the side-effect of using magnetic cores.
Sorry, but that's nonsense. I gave some examples from that era, where non-volatility was not a 'side-effect', but an essential property
without which the system(s) couldn't function,, especially in the
abscence of on-line mass-storage.
If a property exists in a technology, it is used - of course. But this
does not mean, that a technology was especially designed for this use case.
As soon as *non-volatile* integrated circuits became cheaper, they
replaced core memory within a few years, because the proporty "non
volatile" was not the important thing. Instead having a lot of cheap RAM >> was much more important - also when core memory was invented.
I think you mean "*volatile* integrated circuits", otherwise the rest
of your comments do not make any sense. And indeed, after the second generation HP computers with core memory (2100), the third generation (21MX) had volatile RAM with ICs.
Exactly - *volatile* memory chips replaced core memory when they got available and cheaper than core memory, because implementing RAM was the
main use case for core memory and not the fact, that it is non-volatile.
Even machines with core memory still had some kind of external storage (punched tape, magnetic tape, drum memory etc.) because you still need
some kind of permanent storage even with core memory.
What I'm talking about here, is NOT extending the memory but DOUBLING the storage (tripling the storage, quadrupling the storage, whatever).
As sdcards get cheaper, I pop a new triple-sized sdcard into my phone, and Voila! Instantly all my editors have TRIPLE the storage to store files in!
That's what I mean by "portable storage".
What I'm talking about here, is NOT extending the memory but DOUBLING the
storage (tripling the storage, quadrupling the storage, whatever).
As sdcards get cheaper, I pop a new triple-sized sdcard into my phone, and >> Voila! Instantly all my editors have TRIPLE the storage to store files in! >>
That's what I mean by "portable storage".
Presumably, this "portable storage" is being used by your phone (photos, SMS. whatever). When you "pop a new triple-sized sdcard into your
phone", how do you get whatever information (photos, SMS. whatever) that were on the old "portable storage" onto the new "portable storage"??
On Sun, 27 Apr 2025 00:07:58 +1000, Daniel70 wrote :
What I'm talking about here, is NOT extending the memory but DOUBLING the >>> storage (tripling the storage, quadrupling the storage, whatever).
As sdcards get cheaper, I pop a new triple-sized sdcard into my phone, and >>> Voila! Instantly all my editors have TRIPLE the storage to store files in! >>>
That's what I mean by "portable storage".
Presumably, this "portable storage" is being used by your phone (photos,
SMS. whatever). When you "pop a new triple-sized sdcard into your
phone", how do you get whatever information (photos, SMS. whatever) that
were on the old "portable storage" onto the new "portable storage"??
Hi Daniel,
That's an insightful question, where it's my estimate that something like
one in a thousand people understand enough of portable storage in this context to make it so convenient that it's actually seamless to do.
In article <m0br40Ff8v9U2@mid.individual.net>, Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote: ...
I don't call an SSD a flash media.
Why not? SSD *is* flash storage. Just because there is a
controller which takes care of wear leveling, the storage
technology itself is not different to that of SD cards.
Chill out, man.
People often use terminology in idiosyncratic ways.
That doesn't make them wrong. I understand Carlo's frame of
reference, and I accept it. You should do likewise.
Just for one example: In some circles, unless it is a 4 footed
mammal, it is not an "animal".
I assume Carlo's use of terminology is similar.
Chill out, man.
People often use terminology in idiosyncratic ways.
.... which CAN lead to mis-understandings!!
On 02/03/2025 8:34 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2025-02-03 14:09, Kenny McCormack wrote:A rose is a rose, as long as it does the job you want what does it
In article <m0br40Ff8v9U2@mid.individual.net>, Arno Welzel
<usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote: ...
I don't call an SSD a flash media.
Why not? SSD *is* flash storage. Just because there is a
controller which takes care of wear leveling, the storage
technology itself is not different to that of SD cards.
Chill out, man.
People often use terminology in idiosyncratic ways. That doesn't
make them wrong. I understand Carlo's frame of reference, and I
accept it. You should do likewise.
Just for one example: In some circles, unless it is a 4 footed
mammal, it is not an "animal".
I assume Carlo's use of terminology is similar.
This minute, I do not know how to name SSDs. I'm confused.
matter what it is called. I have many useful devices called
Thingamajig.
Newyana2, 2025-02-03 21:15:
Lawrence just spends his days trying to one-up other people,
especially with tech trivia. Why do you let him?
SSD is unambiguous. Like you, I don't call it a flash drive. I
don't call anything flash. There are USB sticks, SSDs and SD
cards. The type of data strorage they use is not a practical
concern. Those terms are specific in terms of IDing the item.
Well - it was not about not calling SSD "flash media". The origin of
this discussion was this sentence by Carlos:
"Also I *never* edit a file residing in flash storage."
And "flash storage" or "flash memory" is the name for a storage
technology. SSD is "flash storage" as well as USB sticks or SD cards,
because all these media use the same basic technology, just with
different detail implementations like wear leveling etc..
Also see: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flash_memory> and the
sources referred there.
Of course you can always decide to only call an SD card "flash media"
and anything else working with the same technology "SSD" and "USB
stick" depending on what you use exactly. But using technical terms
this way makes any discussion about technology quite difficoult -
because then you always need to know, that a person understands as
"flash media". One might see only SD cards as "flash media" while
another one would call a USB stick as "flash media".
That's an insightful question, where it's my estimate that something like
one in a thousand people understand enough of portable storage in this
context to make it so convenient that it's actually seamless to do.
Thank you for your detailed response.
My query stemmed from my 'belief' that you were working with just the
phone and the old and new SD Cards. Only one SD plugged in at a time so
how did you get data from one to the other ..... unless you removed the "Phone System" SD (losing the phone function, maybe), plugged in the
"new" SD then did the tranfer from "old" SD content to "new" SD then reorganised things so you could plug in the "Phone System" SD again.
On Mon, 10 Feb 2025 08:47:39 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-09 00:35:
So you never used core memory.
Correct. But core memory is not intended as *persistent* memory,
even when it can be used this way.
It was indeed regularly used that way. Consider that, on machines
from the core memory era, there was no rCLboot ROMrCY. The first-stage bootloader was typically around a dozen machine instructions or so,
which had to be hand- entered using front-panel switches.
(No doubt seasoned operators had this memorized.) It was handy that
this could be preserved across power cycles, assuming it didnrCOt get overwritten by some wayward buggy program.
Then there were applications that ran without an OS as such. For
example, on the PDP-8, you could load a BASIC interpreter. This would
take about 20 minutes to load off paper tape. So the fact that a
power cycle did not wipe memory was helpful if you had a lot of BASIC programs to run.
On 11/02/2025 12:00 pm, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Mon, 10 Feb 2025 08:47:39 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-09 00:35:
So you never used core memory.
Correct. But core memory is not intended as *persistent* memory,
even when it can be used this way.
It was indeed regularly used that way. Consider that, on machines
from the core memory era, there was no ?boot ROM?. The first-stage bootloader was typically around a dozen machine instructions or so,
which had to be hand- entered using front-panel switches.
I remember having to do that on a PDP-8 (was it??) in 1982-3.
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2(No doubt seasoned operators had this memorized.) It was handy that
this could be preserved across power cycles, assuming it didn?t get overwritten by some wayward buggy program.
Then there were applications that ran without an OS as such. For
example, on the PDP-8, you could load a BASIC interpreter. This would
take about 20 minutes to load off paper tape. So the fact that a
power cycle did not wipe memory was helpful if you had a lot of BASIC programs to run.
Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
On 11/02/2025 12:00 pm, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Mon, 10 Feb 2025 08:47:39 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-09 00:35:
So you never used core memory.
Correct. But core memory is not intended as *persistent* memory,
even when it can be used this way.
It was indeed regularly used that way. Consider that, on machines
from the core memory era, there was no ?boot ROM?. The first-stage
bootloader was typically around a dozen machine instructions or so,
which had to be hand- entered using front-panel switches.
I remember having to do that on a PDP-8 (was it??) in 1982-3.
That seems rather late!
On 14/05/2025 10:54 pm, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
On 11/02/2025 12:00 pm, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Mon, 10 Feb 2025 08:47:39 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-09 00:35:
So you never used core memory.
Correct. But core memory is not intended as *persistent* memory,
even when it can be used this way.
It was indeed regularly used that way. Consider that, on machines
from the core memory era, there was no ?boot ROM?. The first-stage
bootloader was typically around a dozen machine instructions or so,
which had to be hand- entered using front-panel switches.
I remember having to do that on a PDP-8 (was it??) in 1982-3.
That seems rather late!
For computing, yes, that might seem rather late ... but for its purpose (Training us in how an Aust Army Direction Finding system worked) it was quite reasonable. I don't know what the actual DF system used.
Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
On 14/05/2025 10:54 pm, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
On 11/02/2025 12:00 pm, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Mon, 10 Feb 2025 08:47:39 +0100, Arno Welzel wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 2025-02-09 00:35:
So you never used core memory.
Correct. But core memory is not intended as *persistent*
memory, even when it can be used this way.
It was indeed regularly used that way. Consider that, on
machines from the core memory era, there was no ?boot ROM?.
The first-stage bootloader was typically around a dozen
machine instructions or so, which had to be hand- entered
using front-panel switches.
I remember having to do that on a PDP-8 (was it??) in 1982-3.
That seems rather late!
For computing, yes, that might seem rather late ... but for its
purpose (Training us in how an Aust Army Direction Finding system
worked) it was quite reasonable. I don't know what the actual DF
system used.
I see! Yes. Defense Force systems have a very long lifecycle. In
aerospace even longer, for obvious reasons.
They used HP 21MX (16-bit) mini-computers in some missiles. At the
time, it felt rather strange, letting an expensive computer
self-destruct. Sadly enough, these days it's no longer strange at
all! :-(
| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 59 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 24:09:42 |
| Calls: | 810 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 1,287 |
| D/L today: |
12 files (21,036K bytes) |
| Messages: | 195,978 |