Rockbox mail archiveSubject: Re: FAT32 questions and suggestions
Re: FAT32 questions and suggestions
From: Daniel Stenberg <daniel_at_haxx.se>
Date: Wed, 8 May 2002 10:27:49 +0200 (MET DST)
On Wed, 8 May 2002, Dave Chapman wrote:
> Am I correct in saying this? Is it possible for the FAT32 driver to return
> both the short and long names? If so, the buffer in tree.c just needs to
> store the short name (for accessing the file) and the first 16 characters
> of the full name (for display on the screen).
As Robert Hak (adiamas) pointed out to me on IRC, we won't gain very much on
that though since we need the full name anyway to display the tune properly.
Like when we move up and down we probably want the full name scrolled like
the current Archos software does to show the whole name. We can't just settle
with the 16 (whatever) initial letters.
We should probably also make an effort to cut off redundant parts of the file
name to shorten unnecessary info, like ".mp3". I also have an idea that we
should cut off any prefixes from files that are identical to the current
directory's name. Like if you're in the directory "Artist", you can strip off
"Artist - " automaticly from all files before displaying them.
> Also, are there any limits on the number of files/subdirs in a directory on
> the FAT32 filesystem? Is the limit different for the root directory?
We can safely assume that the full path will never get longer than 260 bytes,
as I believe Windows has an issue with longer paths than that.
> One remaining improvement to tree.c is to sort the directories in
> alphabetical order. Unless we want very slow browsing, this will mean
> reading the entire directory into memory. Can anyone suggest a sensible
> limit for the size of this array?
Not only should it be possible to sort the file names, but I bet that people
will want one of those vertical sliders to the left of the list like the
Archos original software has. Such a one requires that we know the total
number of files and directories before we display any part of it.
I could very well accept an upper limit for this feature, and if there are
more files we disable it and consider the amount "huge" and just disable the
sorting and slider and whatever...
Initially, I can accept a fixed maximum entries-per-directory limit.
-- Daniel Stenberg -- Hacking Archos => http://bjorn.haxx.se/rockbox/Received on 2002-05-08