Re: [gentoo-user] Memory cards and deleting files.

[Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1788 bytes --]

On Mon, 22 Jun 2020 08:19:28 -0500, Dale wrote:

> >>> The SD standard says >33G should use exFAT, this is why many devices
> >>> state they only support cards up to 32G. The really mean they only
> >>> support FAT. My Dashcam is like this but it happily works with a
> >>> 128G card, once I reformatted it with FAT.    
> >>   Warning; that still does not change the fact that each individual
> >> file cannot exceed 4G in size on regular FAT.  
> > That's right, but a device designed to work with only FAT should never
> > try to save larger files. Any such devices I have used tend to split
> > videos into chunks of 1GB or smaller.
> >
> >  
> 
> 
> So if I bought a 64GB card, I forced it to be formatted with FAT on say
> my Linux box here, it would work in my trail cameras anyway?  It makes
> sense.  It would seem it is more of a file system issue since accessing
> a device shouldn't be affected my its capacity, well, maybe some
> exceptions.  My trail camera may only support FAT which is only found on
> 32GB and smaller.  I can get that. 

It should work, but don't cry to me if it doesn't ;-)

> To be honest, even tho I leave that thing out there sometimes for months
> without checking it, and it takes a ton of pics, I don't recall it even
> going over a couple GBs or so.  Even the one that takes videos doesn't
> store a lot of data.  I don't think I'd buy that expensive a card but
> still, interesting that it is a option.  I'm thinking even my Canon
> camera can handle this.  That's a lot of pics tho. 

My dashcam really eats up the space. If I forget to turn it off at night,
even a 128G card only holds abut 2 days of video.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

WinErr 00F: Unexplained error - Please tell us how this happened

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]