Can files be transferred from an ext4 drive to a FAT32 drive without file corruption?

[Governor]

When I partitioned my internal hdd, I created a FAT32 partition because, right or wrong, I was under the impression that it would be a safer way to transfer files from the hdd to a FAT32 thumb drive, for later use on a Windows computer. Unfortunately, this setup seems to have caused unforeseen problems. If I can get better results by having all partitions in ext4 format, then that seems like the way to go.

I just need to know:
Can files be transferred from an ext4 drive to a FAT32 drive without file corruption?
Thanks.

[stevie pup]

I've copied many files (music, videos, documents, etc) from various Linux systems, which would all have been either Ext3 or Ext4, to Fat32 USB sticks without any problems of file corruption. Also copied them to a FAT32 portable hard drive without issue. Copied them other way as well, Fat32 to Linux system, again without any issues.

[Governor]

I've copied many files (music, videos, documents, etc) from various Linux systems, which would all have been either Ext3 or Ext4, to Fat32 USB sticks without any problems of file corruption. Also copied them to a FAT32 portable hard drive without issue. Copied them other way as well, Fat32 to Linux system, again without any issues.

Thanks. I will go with your answer.

Next question:
Can a FAT32 partition be converted to ext4 without losing files?

[Flash]

You can copy files from any filesystem to any other filesystem without corrupting the files. Files are files. They are not changed by the filesystem they're stored in.

[Governor]

You can copy files from any filesystem to any other filesystem without corrupting the files. Files are files. They are not changed by the filesystem they're stored in.

I was not sure if the conversion from one file system to another could cause corruption. So it is 100% safe to copy files to and from different types of file systems?

So, the problems I experienced must be related to executibles that can't handle FAT32, or apps that can't handle spaces in the paths?
Now I figure if I can avoid FAT32 altogether on my internal partitions, it ought to save a lot of headaches.

[stevie pup]

Next question:
Can a FAT32 partition be converted to ext4 without losing files?

No. When you change the format of a partition it wipes it clean, so deletes anything that's there.

So, the problems I experienced must be related to executibles that can't handle FAT32, or apps that can't handle spaces in the paths?

Not sure about that I'm afraid. What exactly happened, what went wrong?

[williwaw]

Now I figure if I can avoid FAT32 altogether on my internal partitions, it ought to save a lot of headaches.

you will most likely want a fat32 partition at the beginning of the drive to enable UEFI booting.
https://unix.stackexchange.com/question ... d-on-fat32

[Governor]

Next question:
Can a FAT32 partition be converted to ext4 without losing files?

No. When you change the format of a partition it wipes it clean, so deletes anything that's there.

So, the problems I experienced must be related to executibles that can't handle FAT32, or apps that can't handle spaces in the paths?

Not sure about that I'm afraid. What exactly happened, what went wrong?

Apparently, some apps cannot handle FAT32 drives, and/or spaces in directory or filenames.
https://www.forum.puppylinux.com/viewto ... ve#p119410

My plan is to avoid FAT32 for my apps, and use underscore instead of spaces so I won't have any related issues. Except for the FAT32 boot partition, I will make sure my other 4 partitions are ext4.

[mikeslr]

Under Linux everything is a file including symbolic links. Fat32 can not handle symbolic links. If an application employs a symbolic link, transferring it to a Fat32 partition will break it.

[bigpup]

If the fat32 format is already fragmented.

Fat32 format's file system can fragment over time.

Fragmentation is when a files data is not in a continuous location.

Parts of it are in different locations, thus fragmented.

Files could be corrupted, when placed on a fat32 formatted partition if fragmented.

That is why you must first de-fragment the fat32 file system or at least do it every so often.

[bigpup]

Under Linux everything is a file including symbolic links. Fat32 can not handle symbolic links. If an application employs a symbolic link, transferring it to a Fat32 partition will break it.

This is why a save file can work placed on a fat32 format location.

A save file is a Linux file system inside a file.

[Opi5b]

because Fat32 and most earlier versions (16, and plain FAT) fragment, i use ext3. ext4 has a few bugs in it still being resolved, but ext3 is near perfect.
i would convert to ext3/4 and stick to it where possible.

[Governor]

Under Linux everything is a file including symbolic links. Fat32 can not handle symbolic links. If an application employs a symbolic link, transferring it to a Fat32 partition will break it.

I don't know what a symbolic link is.
Is it like when you drag an executable into the "send to" configuration window and you must choose if it should be a relative or absolute link?
I always choose absolute there because I don't know what a relative link is, and I want a link to the actual executable file.

[Governor]

because Fat32 and most earlier versions (16, and plain FAT) fragment, i use ext3. ext4 has a few bugs in it still being resolved, but ext3 is near perfect.
i would convert to ext3/4 and stick to it where possible.

A few bugs?!?

I always thought the newer number of a software should have fewer bugs than the preceding version. So, does that only count for minor updates?
So you mean ext4 is a new-fangled experimental version and not a continuation and improvement over ext3?

I am now wondering, do I need to transfer all my files to temporary drives, re-format my partitions to ext3, and copy the files back again.
And if I do this, can I copy all the files from ext4 to FAT32 and back to ext3 without corruption. Someone already said that there should be no corruption issues, but I am cautious and want to be sure about it.
Thanks.

[Governor]

If the fat32 format is already fragmented.

Fat32 format's file system can fragment over time.

Fragmentation is when a files data is not in a continuous location.

Parts of it are in different locations, thus fragmented.

Files could be corrupted, when placed on a fat32 formatted partition if fragmented.

That is why you must first de-fragment the fat32 file system or at least do it every so often.

Is it possible to de-fragment a FAT32 partition using fossapup64_9.5? I do have access to a Windows computer which I can use to defrag, but I can't access my laptop internal drive from a Windows computer unless I remove the drive from my laptop and use a USB adapter, which I don't have.
Thanks.

[Governor]

Under Linux everything is a file including symbolic links. Fat32 can not handle symbolic links. If an application employs a symbolic link, transferring it to a Fat32 partition will break it.

This is why a save file can work placed on a fat32 format location.

A save file is a Linux file system inside a file.

Good to know. I hope one day it will be possible for me to actually use savefiles and reload my settings on re-boot. It would seem pointless to use the savefolder method, if I can't reliably back it up to a FAT32 thumb drive. Do Linux users normallly have ext3/4 formatted thumbdrives onhand?

[williwaw]

the only people who need fat32 are windows users and those wishing to boot using UEFI.
why would you need fat32 for backup?

[Governor]

the only people who need fat32 are windows users and those wishing to boot using UEFI.
why would you need fat32 for backup?

I wish to boot using UEFI.
I also download different types of files that I need to be able to access on a Windows computer.

As I understand it, if I have a dedicated Linux backup drive that is ext3, then I could use it for both savefiles and savefolders. So maybe I need to buy another USB for that purpose alone.

[williwaw]

As I understand it, if I have a dedicated Linux backup drive that is ext3, then I could use it for both savefiles and savefolders. So maybe I need to buy another USB for that purpose alone.

you could partition your backup disk with a fat32 partition sized to meet your file transfer to/from windows machine needs, and format a second ext3 partition for use with savefolders, linux stuff etc
make the fat32 the first partition