Big FAT32 volume is detected as RAW under Windows
0
I created 450 GB FAT32 volume in GPT partition table using mkfs.fat. It works without any problem on Linux. When I connect it to computer with Windows 10, it says it is RAW and wants to format it.
/dev/sdxX: DOS/MBR boot sector, code offset 0x58+2, OEM-ID "mkfs.fat", Bytes/sector 4096, sectors/cluster 64, reserved sectors 64, Media descriptor 0xf8, sectors/track 63, heads 255, hidden sectors 2099200, sectors 117964800 (volumes > 32 MB), FAT (32 bit), sectors/FAT 1856, reserved 0x1, serial number 0x7163f35a, label: "XXXXX "
windows partitioning formatting fat32
asked Dec 26 '18 at 16:14
jiwopenejiwopene
1134
add a comment |
0
I created 450 GB FAT32 volume in GPT partition table using mkfs.fat. It works without any problem on Linux. When I connect it to computer with Windows 10, it says it is RAW and wants to format it.
/dev/sdxX: DOS/MBR boot sector, code offset 0x58+2, OEM-ID "mkfs.fat", Bytes/sector 4096, sectors/cluster 64, reserved sectors 64, Media descriptor 0xf8, sectors/track 63, heads 255, hidden sectors 2099200, sectors 117964800 (volumes > 32 MB), FAT (32 bit), sectors/FAT 1856, reserved 0x1, serial number 0x7163f35a, label: "XXXXX "
windows partitioning formatting fat32
asked Dec 26 '18 at 16:14
jiwopenejiwopene
1134
add a comment |
0
0
0
I created 450 GB FAT32 volume in GPT partition table using mkfs.fat. It works without any problem on Linux. When I connect it to computer with Windows 10, it says it is RAW and wants to format it.
/dev/sdxX: DOS/MBR boot sector, code offset 0x58+2, OEM-ID "mkfs.fat", Bytes/sector 4096, sectors/cluster 64, reserved sectors 64, Media descriptor 0xf8, sectors/track 63, heads 255, hidden sectors 2099200, sectors 117964800 (volumes > 32 MB), FAT (32 bit), sectors/FAT 1856, reserved 0x1, serial number 0x7163f35a, label: "XXXXX "
windows partitioning formatting fat32
asked Dec 26 '18 at 16:14
jiwopenejiwopene
1134
I created 450 GB FAT32 volume in GPT partition table using mkfs.fat. It works without any problem on Linux. When I connect it to computer with Windows 10, it says it is RAW and wants to format it.
/dev/sdxX: DOS/MBR boot sector, code offset 0x58+2, OEM-ID "mkfs.fat", Bytes/sector 4096, sectors/cluster 64, reserved sectors 64, Media descriptor 0xf8, sectors/track 63, heads 255, hidden sectors 2099200, sectors 117964800 (volumes > 32 MB), FAT (32 bit), sectors/FAT 1856, reserved 0x1, serial number 0x7163f35a, label: "XXXXX "
windows partitioning formatting fat32
windows partitioning formatting fat32
asked Dec 26 '18 at 16:14
jiwopenejiwopene
1134
asked Dec 26 '18 at 16:14
jiwopenejiwopene
1134
asked Dec 26 '18 at 16:14
jiwopenejiwopene
1134
asked Dec 26 '18 at 16:14
jiwopenejiwopene
1134
asked Dec 26 '18 at 16:14
jiwopenejiwopene
1134
1134
add a comment |
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
0
I reformatted it and tried again. It works now.
Old configuration:
/dev/sdxX: DOS/MBR boot sector, code offset 0x58+2, OEM-ID "mkfs.fat", Bytes/sector 4096, sectors/cluster 64, reserved sectors 64, Media descriptor 0xf8, sectors/track 63, heads 255, hidden sectors 2099200, sectors 117964800 (volumes > 32 MB), FAT (32 bit), sectors/FAT 1856, reserved 0x1, serial number 0x7163f35a, label: "XXXXX "
New configuration:
/dev/sdxX: DOS/MBR boot sector, code offset 0x58+2, OEM-ID "mkfs.fat", sectors/cluster 128, reserved sectors 128, Media descriptor 0xf8, sectors/track 63, heads 255, hidden sectors 945817600, sectors 524288000 (volumes > 32 MB), FAT (32 bit), sectors/FAT 32000, reserved 0x1, serial number 0xf6f03521, label: "XXXXX "
See difference in Bytes/sector 4096 (the new configuration has 512).
Correct command for formatting:
mkfs.fat /dev/sdxX -F 32 -n XXXXX -S 512 -s 128
Windows can't use FAT volumes with Bytes/sector (-S) set to value that is not 512.
answered Dec 27 '18 at 12:19
jiwopenejiwopene
1134
add a comment |
-1
Thanks for posting in our forum!
1. please run cmd command ”chkdsk” to check disk.
- It is not recommended to format 450G disks into FAT32. NTFS format is recommended.
Hope this information can help you. If you have any questions, please let me know.
Best Regards,
Daniel
answered Dec 27 '18 at 6:40
daniel zhoudaniel zhou
1
chkdskdoes not run on RAW volumes, IIRC. I tried reformatting and I am going to post new state in ~5 hours (I can't use Windows at the moment).
– jiwopene
Dec 27 '18 at 10:49
I know it is not the best option but I want to store the data in filesystem that can be used on nearly all operating systems. NTFS, ext2/3/4, btrfs, exFAT and others are not compatible with so many OSes.
– jiwopene
Dec 27 '18 at 12:22
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "3"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
draft saved
draft discarded
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsuperuser.com%2fquestions%2f1387858%2fbig-fat32-volume-is-detected-as-raw-under-windows%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
0
I reformatted it and tried again. It works now.
Old configuration:
/dev/sdxX: DOS/MBR boot sector, code offset 0x58+2, OEM-ID "mkfs.fat", Bytes/sector 4096, sectors/cluster 64, reserved sectors 64, Media descriptor 0xf8, sectors/track 63, heads 255, hidden sectors 2099200, sectors 117964800 (volumes > 32 MB), FAT (32 bit), sectors/FAT 1856, reserved 0x1, serial number 0x7163f35a, label: "XXXXX "
New configuration:
/dev/sdxX: DOS/MBR boot sector, code offset 0x58+2, OEM-ID "mkfs.fat", sectors/cluster 128, reserved sectors 128, Media descriptor 0xf8, sectors/track 63, heads 255, hidden sectors 945817600, sectors 524288000 (volumes > 32 MB), FAT (32 bit), sectors/FAT 32000, reserved 0x1, serial number 0xf6f03521, label: "XXXXX "
See difference in Bytes/sector 4096 (the new configuration has 512).
Correct command for formatting:
mkfs.fat /dev/sdxX -F 32 -n XXXXX -S 512 -s 128
Windows can't use FAT volumes with Bytes/sector (-S) set to value that is not 512.
answered Dec 27 '18 at 12:19
jiwopenejiwopene
1134
add a comment |
0
I reformatted it and tried again. It works now.
Old configuration:
/dev/sdxX: DOS/MBR boot sector, code offset 0x58+2, OEM-ID "mkfs.fat", Bytes/sector 4096, sectors/cluster 64, reserved sectors 64, Media descriptor 0xf8, sectors/track 63, heads 255, hidden sectors 2099200, sectors 117964800 (volumes > 32 MB), FAT (32 bit), sectors/FAT 1856, reserved 0x1, serial number 0x7163f35a, label: "XXXXX "
New configuration:
/dev/sdxX: DOS/MBR boot sector, code offset 0x58+2, OEM-ID "mkfs.fat", sectors/cluster 128, reserved sectors 128, Media descriptor 0xf8, sectors/track 63, heads 255, hidden sectors 945817600, sectors 524288000 (volumes > 32 MB), FAT (32 bit), sectors/FAT 32000, reserved 0x1, serial number 0xf6f03521, label: "XXXXX "
See difference in Bytes/sector 4096 (the new configuration has 512).
Correct command for formatting:
mkfs.fat /dev/sdxX -F 32 -n XXXXX -S 512 -s 128
Windows can't use FAT volumes with Bytes/sector (-S) set to value that is not 512.
answered Dec 27 '18 at 12:19
jiwopenejiwopene
1134
add a comment |
0
0
0
I reformatted it and tried again. It works now.
Old configuration:
/dev/sdxX: DOS/MBR boot sector, code offset 0x58+2, OEM-ID "mkfs.fat", Bytes/sector 4096, sectors/cluster 64, reserved sectors 64, Media descriptor 0xf8, sectors/track 63, heads 255, hidden sectors 2099200, sectors 117964800 (volumes > 32 MB), FAT (32 bit), sectors/FAT 1856, reserved 0x1, serial number 0x7163f35a, label: "XXXXX "
New configuration:
/dev/sdxX: DOS/MBR boot sector, code offset 0x58+2, OEM-ID "mkfs.fat", sectors/cluster 128, reserved sectors 128, Media descriptor 0xf8, sectors/track 63, heads 255, hidden sectors 945817600, sectors 524288000 (volumes > 32 MB), FAT (32 bit), sectors/FAT 32000, reserved 0x1, serial number 0xf6f03521, label: "XXXXX "
See difference in Bytes/sector 4096 (the new configuration has 512).
Correct command for formatting:
mkfs.fat /dev/sdxX -F 32 -n XXXXX -S 512 -s 128
Windows can't use FAT volumes with Bytes/sector (-S) set to value that is not 512.
answered Dec 27 '18 at 12:19
jiwopenejiwopene
1134
I reformatted it and tried again. It works now.
Old configuration:
/dev/sdxX: DOS/MBR boot sector, code offset 0x58+2, OEM-ID "mkfs.fat", Bytes/sector 4096, sectors/cluster 64, reserved sectors 64, Media descriptor 0xf8, sectors/track 63, heads 255, hidden sectors 2099200, sectors 117964800 (volumes > 32 MB), FAT (32 bit), sectors/FAT 1856, reserved 0x1, serial number 0x7163f35a, label: "XXXXX "
New configuration:
/dev/sdxX: DOS/MBR boot sector, code offset 0x58+2, OEM-ID "mkfs.fat", sectors/cluster 128, reserved sectors 128, Media descriptor 0xf8, sectors/track 63, heads 255, hidden sectors 945817600, sectors 524288000 (volumes > 32 MB), FAT (32 bit), sectors/FAT 32000, reserved 0x1, serial number 0xf6f03521, label: "XXXXX "
See difference in Bytes/sector 4096 (the new configuration has 512).
Correct command for formatting:
mkfs.fat /dev/sdxX -F 32 -n XXXXX -S 512 -s 128
Windows can't use FAT volumes with Bytes/sector (-S) set to value that is not 512.
answered Dec 27 '18 at 12:19
jiwopenejiwopene
1134
answered Dec 27 '18 at 12:19
jiwopenejiwopene
1134
answered Dec 27 '18 at 12:19
jiwopenejiwopene
1134
answered Dec 27 '18 at 12:19
jiwopenejiwopene
1134
1134
add a comment |
add a comment |
-1
Thanks for posting in our forum!
1. please run cmd command ”chkdsk” to check disk.
- It is not recommended to format 450G disks into FAT32. NTFS format is recommended.
Hope this information can help you. If you have any questions, please let me know.
Best Regards,
Daniel
answered Dec 27 '18 at 6:40
daniel zhoudaniel zhou
1
chkdskdoes not run on RAW volumes, IIRC. I tried reformatting and I am going to post new state in ~5 hours (I can't use Windows at the moment).
– jiwopene
Dec 27 '18 at 10:49
I know it is not the best option but I want to store the data in filesystem that can be used on nearly all operating systems. NTFS, ext2/3/4, btrfs, exFAT and others are not compatible with so many OSes.
– jiwopene
Dec 27 '18 at 12:22
add a comment |
-1
Thanks for posting in our forum!
1. please run cmd command ”chkdsk” to check disk.
- It is not recommended to format 450G disks into FAT32. NTFS format is recommended.
Hope this information can help you. If you have any questions, please let me know.
Best Regards,
Daniel
answered Dec 27 '18 at 6:40
daniel zhoudaniel zhou
1
chkdskdoes not run on RAW volumes, IIRC. I tried reformatting and I am going to post new state in ~5 hours (I can't use Windows at the moment).
– jiwopene
Dec 27 '18 at 10:49
I know it is not the best option but I want to store the data in filesystem that can be used on nearly all operating systems. NTFS, ext2/3/4, btrfs, exFAT and others are not compatible with so many OSes.
– jiwopene
Dec 27 '18 at 12:22
add a comment |
-1
-1
-1
Thanks for posting in our forum!
1. please run cmd command ”chkdsk” to check disk.
- It is not recommended to format 450G disks into FAT32. NTFS format is recommended.
Hope this information can help you. If you have any questions, please let me know.
Best Regards,
Daniel
answered Dec 27 '18 at 6:40
daniel zhoudaniel zhou
1
Thanks for posting in our forum!
1. please run cmd command ”chkdsk” to check disk.
- It is not recommended to format 450G disks into FAT32. NTFS format is recommended.
Hope this information can help you. If you have any questions, please let me know.
Best Regards,
Daniel
answered Dec 27 '18 at 6:40
daniel zhoudaniel zhou
1
answered Dec 27 '18 at 6:40
daniel zhoudaniel zhou
1
answered Dec 27 '18 at 6:40
daniel zhoudaniel zhou
1
answered Dec 27 '18 at 6:40
daniel zhoudaniel zhou
1
1
chkdskdoes not run on RAW volumes, IIRC. I tried reformatting and I am going to post new state in ~5 hours (I can't use Windows at the moment).
– jiwopene
Dec 27 '18 at 10:49
I know it is not the best option but I want to store the data in filesystem that can be used on nearly all operating systems. NTFS, ext2/3/4, btrfs, exFAT and others are not compatible with so many OSes.
– jiwopene
Dec 27 '18 at 12:22
add a comment |
chkdskdoes not run on RAW volumes, IIRC. I tried reformatting and I am going to post new state in ~5 hours (I can't use Windows at the moment).
– jiwopene
Dec 27 '18 at 10:49
I know it is not the best option but I want to store the data in filesystem that can be used on nearly all operating systems. NTFS, ext2/3/4, btrfs, exFAT and others are not compatible with so many OSes.
– jiwopene
Dec 27 '18 at 12:22
chkdsk does not run on RAW volumes, IIRC. I tried reformatting and I am going to post new state in ~5 hours (I can't use Windows at the moment).– jiwopene
Dec 27 '18 at 10:49
chkdsk does not run on RAW volumes, IIRC. I tried reformatting and I am going to post new state in ~5 hours (I can't use Windows at the moment).– jiwopene
Dec 27 '18 at 10:49
I know it is not the best option but I want to store the data in filesystem that can be used on nearly all operating systems. NTFS, ext2/3/4, btrfs, exFAT and others are not compatible with so many OSes.
– jiwopene
Dec 27 '18 at 12:22
I know it is not the best option but I want to store the data in filesystem that can be used on nearly all operating systems. NTFS, ext2/3/4, btrfs, exFAT and others are not compatible with so many OSes.
– jiwopene
Dec 27 '18 at 12:22
add a comment |
draft saved
draft discarded
Thanks for contributing an answer to Super User!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
draft saved
draft discarded
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsuperuser.com%2fquestions%2f1387858%2fbig-fat32-volume-is-detected-as-raw-under-windows%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
