Skip to content

Consider using fat-rs #2

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed
thejpster opened this issue Feb 19, 2019 · 4 comments
Closed

Consider using fat-rs #2

thejpster opened this issue Feb 19, 2019 · 4 comments

Comments

@thejpster
Copy link
Member

We should consider switching to FAT-rs (https://gitlab.com/susurrus/fat-rs/tree/master). No sense in duplicating work, if it:

  • Works on #[no_std]
  • Builds on stable
  • Doesn't use alloc
@thejpster
Copy link
Member Author

(https://github.com/rafalh/rust-fatfs fails this test because it uses core_io, which needs nightly, and uses alloc)

@twilco
Copy link

twilco commented Feb 20, 2019

From fat-rs's README:

Eventually this will be migrated to use core_ios traits in order to be compatible with other libraries in the nascent no_std Rust ecosystem.

Looks like they might be moving towards core_io, too. Also, perhaps this is an ignorant question, but is it odd that these crates are moving towards core_io which requires alloc? Isn't the idea with embedded to avoid allocation whenever possible, meaning the utility of these crates becomes more limited by using implementations that require allocation?

Finally, I haven't been able to find a published crate on crates.io for fat-rs - perhaps I'm just missing it? 🙂

@rafalh
Copy link

rafalh commented Jun 12, 2019

Please note https://github.com/rafalh/rust-fatfs requires alloc only if you need LFN support.

@thejpster
Copy link
Member Author

We have write support now. But we should keep an eye on what other crates are doing.

github-merge-queue bot pushed a commit that referenced this issue Jan 12, 2024
lib: update dependency embedded-hal to 1.0.0
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants