Page 1 of 1
My savefile doesn't work.
Posted: 07 Jan 2024, 12:07
by Cayman1945
I followed savefile manager tutorial and putted UUID of my USB in porteus.cfg because I realised that after reboot my USB name changes from sdc to sdg etc. but it still doesn't work and shows I have to create savefile. My USB is formated with NTFS.
Thanks for time and help.
My savefile doesn't work.
Posted: 07 Jan 2024, 15:24
by AcnapyxoB
Cayman1945 wrote: ↑07 Jan 2024, 12:07
but it still doesn't work and shows
Try with:
changes=UUID:STrING-0F-ChARACtERS/path/savefile.dat
You can find UUID with:
read more in /boot/docs/cheatcodes.txt
My savefile doesn't work.
Posted: 07 Jan 2024, 15:51
by Ed_P
Cayman1945 wrote: ↑07 Jan 2024, 12:07
My USB is formated with NTFS.
Not a good format for USB drives. exFat is better, less overhead, faster response and supports large files.
My savefile doesn't work.
Posted: 09 Jan 2024, 16:31
by burdi01
Ed_P wrote: ↑07 Jan 2024, 15:51
Cayman1945 wrote: ↑07 Jan 2024, 12:07
My USB is formated with NTFS.
Not a good format for USB drives. exFat is better, less overhead, faster response and supports large files.
I tested exfat a few months ago and found it to be slower than ntfs (the fuse type) ...
My savefile doesn't work.
Posted: 09 Jan 2024, 23:39
by Ed_P
burdi01 wrote: ↑09 Jan 2024, 16:31
I tested exfat a few months ago and found it to be slower than ntfs
I am truly surprised. With the journalling ntfs adds to the drive there is overhead which takes resources and time to maintain.
My savefile doesn't work.
Posted: 13 Jan 2024, 06:12
by rych
burdi01 wrote: ↑09 Jan 2024, 16:31
I tested exfat a few months ago and found it to be slower than ntfs (the fuse type)
That's an interesting comparison indeed. Exfat must be kernel and not FUSE by now? So should be fast, and faster than ntfs-3g? We're currently testing the
NTFS3 Kernel Module which should improve your comparison even further in favor of NTFS
