SIDE3: Access FAT from SDX (again?)

[+skr]

I´ve updated my SIDE3 to the latest Firmware and now wanted to access the FAT-partition from SDX.

I know, there is a huge thread, but I didn´t find a solution there, except from copying a prepared image. But I want to do it from scratch.

 

First: I have a Mac with OS X Big Sur and a Windows 10 machine with the latest update. Atari800XL with U1MB, SIDE3, SIO2SD, 1 SD Card with 4GB and 1 SD Card with 16GB.

 

What I did:

 

- 2 GB SD Card in SIDE3

- Boots into SDX 4.49e

- FDISK: 2 Partitions: 2000MB FAT16, remainder APT

- Create APT Partition "C" with 65535 sectors bootable

- format that with FORMAT from SDX

- put SD into Mac, use DISKUTIL as described by Jon

- successfully got FAT16 partition, which the Mac mounts. Put two *.xex on it

- Boot SIDE3 into Fileloader: FAT-partition recognized, can start both files (and wasted an hour playing TimePilot)

- Boot SIDE3 into SDX, using FDISK to install FAT as EXT partition

- try to access DK: - Error 138

- Install FATFS.SYS 0.87L (from SDX toolkit): Still Error 138

 

So: Everything´s working, but I can´t access the FAT16 partition from SDX.

 

CHKFAT says "Not a FAT disk"

 

Next try: Use Windows 10 to format the FAT volume. No success.

Last try: 16GB SD card, initialise as FAT32 (4GB), format it with Windows 10.

 

Same as above: All is working, but I can´t read the FAT partition from SDX.

 

The Config.sys on the SIDE3 is unchanged, I´ve also tried loading FATFS via AUTOEXEC.BAT, but simply can´t read the FAT partition.

 

Any help (that does not sound like "use Linux", simply don´t have and want it) appreciated.

 

 

Edit: Stupid me, I just realise, I used CHKFAT on the APT (C:) partition. Will do correctly now, one moment.

 

Addition: At the last try I forgot to give the FAT partition a Drive number (DK:). When doing this, I get Error 148 and CHKFAT looks like this:

 

Still can´t access K:

[drac030]

12 minutes ago, skr said:

Still can´t access K:

Because according to CHKFAT it is FAT32. FATFS only allows to access FAT12 or FAT16 (last line "FAT version").

[+skr]

24 minutes ago, drac030 said:

Because according to CHKFAT it is FAT32. FATFS only allows to access FAT12 or FAT16 (last line "FAT version").

Yes, I know. I did several tries with FAT16 and got the same result, so I was supposing the error on the Mac/PC side and just tried with FAT32.

Will do a last try with the 4GB card and FAT16 before I hit the sack.

[drac030]

4 minutes ago, skr said:

I did several tries with FAT16 and got the same result, so I was supposing the error on the Mac/PC side and just tried with FAT32.

Also pay attention to the number of sectors, your partition seems to be a tad too large: 8388608 sectors where CHKFAT says about that parameter that it should be lesser than 8387073. And generally adjust the "ERR" stuff, then it should work

 

Edited February 2, 2021 by drac030

[+skr]

Thanks, drac030.

 

Finally I got it. Several things here: Both SD Cards started behaving strange, so I took another 2GB Transcend from one of my Amigas. And than I did, what you proposed but I hate: Math...

From the start installed the FAT as EXT and some APTs, used DISKUTIL on the Mac (as described by @flashjazzcat), back to SIDE3, copied fatfs.sys from SIO2SD onto it and... BOOM.

 

Thanks! Now I finally can go to bed.

[Mazzspeed]

I want to get FAT working under SpartaDOS, I might take some tips from this thread.

 

So it absolutely has to be FAT16?

[drac030]

3 hours ago, Mazzspeed said:

So it absolutely has to be FAT16?

It also can be FAT12, if one prefers For now no FAT32.

 

@skr If I may suggest something, consider replacing that old beta of SDX with the current one

 

[Mazzspeed]

20 minutes ago, drac030 said:

It also can be FAT12, if one prefers For now no FAT32.

 

@skr If I may suggest something, consider replacing that old beta of SDX with the current one

 

Is there any advantage to FAT16 over FAT12? I'm an EXT kinda guy.

[drac030]

FAT12 is to handle smaller volumes, up to 4084 clusters (max is 255 MB I think, although it is recommended for FAT12 disks to be not larger than 4 MB), whereas FAT16 goes up to 65524 clusters and up to nearly 4 GB (although they recommend FAT16 volumes to be not larger than 512 MB). The number "12" or "16" is the number of bits used to address the clusters.

[Mazzspeed]

6 minutes ago, drac030 said:

FAT12 is to handle smaller volumes, up to 4084 clusters (max is 255 MB I think, although it is recommended for FAT12 disks to be not larger than 4 MB), whereas FAT16 goes up to 65524 clusters and up to nearly 4 GB (although they recommend FAT16 volumes to be not larger than 512 MB). The number "12" or "16" is the number of bits used to address the clusters.

I see. I'll probably go FAT16 if there's no performance penalty compared to FAT12.

[+skr]

13 hours ago, drac030 said:

 

@skr If I may suggest something, consider replacing that old beta of SDX with the current one

Of course you may.