• magic_smoke@links.hackliberty.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Linux might have a similar file name restriction, but what’s more important IMO, is the obnoxious file path restrictions NTFS has.

    Naming a file less than 255 chars is a lot easier than keeping its path down.

    Limiting file name is one thing, but dealing with limited path lengths when trying to move a custies folder full of subdir on subdirs is obnoxious when the share name its being transferred to makes it just too long.

    • fakeaustinfloyd@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Can’t you work around that with the extended length prefix of \\?\ (\\?\C:\whateverlongpathhere\)? Though admittedly, it is a pain in the ass to use.

      (edited for clarity and formatting)

    • rdri@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      True. Problem is, moving from more restricted system to less restricted system is a breeze, but painful otherwise. Linux is in a position where it would benefit from any little thing. People trying to switch to Linux will find path length feels like an upgrade, but file name limitation is clearly a downgrade.

        • rdri@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          I guess something like ようこそ『追放者ギルド』へ ~無能なSランクパーティがどんどん有能な冒険者を追放するので、最弱を集めて最強ギルドを創ります~ 1 (ドラゴンコミックスエイジ) - 荒木 佑輔.epub - 92 characters, but 246 bytes. Where on Windows this file hits 35% of the limit, on Linux it hits 96%.

          The file is not some rare case. It’s from a torrent, uploaded somewhere just today. There are tons of files like this with slightly or much longer names. As of 2024, they can’t be served by Linux. Not in a pure file form, that is.