Related
In short:
Is there a thread somewhere stating the pro's and con's of running Android from different types of "media" (SD, NAND, EXT2)?
If there is, please provide a link, I can't seem to find anything that isn't an unanswered question or small comments.
If there isn't, let this be a starting point for those looking for the answer to this question.
Longer:
I've seen this question pop up once and again but it might be that the topic is totally exhausted and people have stopped commenting on it. I can't seem to find an answer though; What are the pro's and con's of using NAND, EXT2, FAT32 or any combination of it?
I see a couple of installation alternatives and some I have been able to conclude myself but others not.
* Running from SD-card using HaRET
This option is the slowest in terms of Android performance. It has the added value of easily getting back to Windows Mobile by rebooting the phone, gaining easy access to the SD card and manipulation options.
* Running the system AND data on NAND
This option has in my view the fastest Android experience. Access to files on the SD card is a bit more cumbersome (there is the SD card split widget APK available but I have yet to see it working) and access to files for manipulation I can't comment on (haven't gotten to that yet).
* Running the system from NAND and data on EXT2
The performance seems almost as fast as the system+data on NAND. I have no idea about the added value of running anything from an EXT2-partition in the SD card but I'm guessing it will be slower. I have no idea if file access for manipulation is easier or not compared to the other options.
* Running the system AND data from EXT2
I have not tried this yet and cannot comment on it. Something tells me it will be slower than NAND because of SD card overhead.
* Running the system from EXT2 and data on NAND
I have not tried this yet and cannot comment on it.
Now, I've missed out on several of the installation options but I'll edit this post as soon as I get to investigating it further.
Any comments/experience/knowledge in this is greatly appreciated, as it can make things clearer as to what options to choose.
Well these are very good question and wanted to start a thread on this matter as well. I also could not find a strait answer anywhere.
I also want to know if there is an advantage using ext2 over fat32.
So, people out there having knowledge about this matter please share it.
Ext2 and Fat32 are both types of filesystem used on various different types of media, including SD card, Hard drives etc.
EXT2 is (one) of the native linux filesystems, and is fully supported in kernel, and is usually faster and more stable in that OS
FAT32 is the 32bit version of the old MSdos filesystem, used up to Windows 98, and still supported by windows machines, but slower and less stable than the native NTFS filesystem used by XP and above.
Nand is actually the type of flash ROM used by our devices, and not a filesystem as such, and running Android in Nand refers to where the information is stored, rather than the filesystem used to store it.
It's equally valid to say that we run WM in Nand also.
I think that in the case of Android EXT2 should be faster and more stable than fat32 since it's designed for Linux, and works better in that OS.
Zenity ik would like to thank you very much as this answers mij questions.
And i think this would many others aswell.
Don't forget - if you format your MicroSD to just EXT2 then you will make it very awkward to transfer files to/from the card on a Microsoft Windows based system.
This may, or may not be a problem for you.
Ultimately, the current ideal situation (IMHO) is to run your OS from NAND, and to store your data (music / movies / documents) on a FAT32 format MicroSD - as this enables you to swap the MicroSD card without turning off the device, and provides best cross-platform usability of the MicroSD for the purposes of transferring data to/from it.
Thank you all!
Thank you all for commenting! I will add your comments to the Android-wiki I'm building as this question could come back repeatedly from newcomers (and old ones who forgot )!
boli99 said:
Don't forget - if you format your MicroSD to just EXT2 then you will make it very awkward to transfer files to/from the card on a Microsoft Windows based system.
This may, or may not be a problem for you.
Ultimately, the current ideal situation (IMHO) is to run your OS from NAND, and to store your data (music / movies / documents) on a FAT32 format MicroSD - as this enables you to swap the MicroSD card without turning off the device, and provides best cross-platform usability of the MicroSD for the purposes of transferring data to/from it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There is a program for allowing the mounting of EXT2 file systems on windows, however they are not signed. This is more problematic in Windows that are 64bit. The program is called 'ext2fsd' and you can get it from source forge. EXT2 is a better file system, and does not have the 4GB file size limit, and does not fragment (although on a SD card, this should not be an issue). EXT2 also has file permissions that Linux understands. Fat32 has no Access control file permissions.
I have just recently got polymod's eclair running with both system and data on ext2 partitions.
my question is...
I am just wondering what the boot order is...
and where(if possible) can it be changed?
system.img in the andboot folder VS system on partition.
I know it can be set in the installer. but lets say I had installed system on ext2 partition. and then later placed a system.img in the andboot folder.
can I swap between the two?
OK...
I figured it out myself,
You can use the installer to select boot options (Not just options to install)
so I have a system and data on partitons. (currently using)
and I also have a second build installed to .img files in the andboot folder. (for failsafe backup)
if I want to swap from one into the other
I enter installer and change the settings for the system and data to
their respective locations and then just QUIT.
I also still have a donut build in the android folder. as well as still running winmo.
quad boot system on my phone...LOL
Now thats a neat use of the installer, I think this find deserves it's own thread in fact, I'm certain others will find it useful
Tanks !
binlabin said:
* Running the system from NAND and data on EXT2
The performance seems almost as fast as the system+data on NAND. I have no idea about the added value of running anything from an EXT2-partition in the SD card but I'm guessing it will be slower. I have no idea if file access for manipulation is easier or not compared to the other options.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've done some tries with this doing the partitioning from within android and then formatting the FAT32 partition from Windows 7 but the FAT32 partition doesn't work very well afterward. Really slow and sometimes crashes the explorer. Propably something to do with my SD-card. May try doing the partitioning and formatting from Linux to see if it works better.
Seems to me the main advantage of this option is to increase the size of available data storage which i suspect can become a limitation sooner or later in a pure NAND install.
EDIT: Now I've done it and gone NAND-System + EXT2-Data... Partitioned the SD-card from Ubuntu with gparted. Resized the FAT32 partition and created 3 primary EXT2 partitions. only the second (partition 3) should be used though with the setup I am using. It's charging right now so I haven't tried it out much yet but I will later on. However I noticed that I now have 171Mb free phone storage instead of 30-something that I had before (same apps installed).
EDIT2: Ran gparted again and shrinked the unused partition (partition 2) and expanded the data partition (partition 3) so I now have 369Mb free "Internal phone storage". Haven't noticed any speed differences between this and when I had data on NAND.
nand
By then one question:
If im install android in the NAND is more fast ready? But this process erase WM6?
Because now android work good in my HTC TYNT II but the camera and bluetooth not work and have one or two performance problems and for this dont like delete WM6 of my phone, and for this im use Android from my SD.
But look the NAND option because have a problems with the time live of my battery only lasts 5hours with android and SD.
Thanks for your help and cooperation
excellent thread which answers some questions that I had. Thanks to everyone who contributed. The only question remaining though and I have posted this elsewhere without getting an answer:
I partitioned a 2 gb sdcard with ~1.6gb Fat32 and the rest as a single Ext2. I selected system on nand and data on ext2 in the installer. After installation, it does show alot more memory for data as compared to data on nand, BUT I also have a data.img in andboot which is in the Fat32 partition, with a size around 250mb. The question is, is the data in that file or on ext2? If I backup data from installer, it creates a databackup.img in andboot with the same size as data.img. Seems to me the ext2 partition is just taking up space and not being used. Can anyone more knowledgeable shed some light on this? Thanks.
Not quite sure what is going on there, seems very counter-intuitive, I would have assumed that system on Nand, data on EXT2 would have installed the data partition to EXT2 on SD. This would seem not to be the case in this instance.
There are a few experiments you could try, if you are brave enough, since you may cause problems by trying any of these suggestions, which could mean a reinstall, I leave it to your judgement how to proceed
Ok firstly I assume you have a card reader, since you managed to partition and format the SD card in the first place. Remove the SD card, insert in card reader, delete the andboot folder, or the contents of the folder, ( may be wise to have a spare SD with either a winmo or android install handy at this point, just in case things go horribly wrong ).
Now with the cleaned SD, put it in the phone and boot, it should boot fine, IF the data is truly on the EXT2 partition.
That at least will answer one question, namely, where the heck is my data?
If this works fine, then I'd just put it down to some inner weirdness of android on non-native devices, if it fails then I'm wondering if your EXT2 partition may have problems, forcing the phone to dump it on the first available good partition, namely the FAT32 one.
Oh and if it does fail, you will have to reinstall, since your data will be toast.
Finally, good luck, I await with interest
As I recall, the install has the FAT32/Ext2 options incorrectly swapped. It has been this way for a while.
zenity said:
Not quite sure what is going on there, seems very counter-intuitive, I would have assumed that system on Nand, data on EXT2 would have installed the data partition to EXT2 on SD. This would seem not to be the case in this instance.
There are a few experiments you could try, if you are brave enough, since you may cause problems by trying any of these suggestions, which could mean a reinstall, I leave it to your judgement how to proceed
Ok firstly I assume you have a card reader, since you managed to partition and format the SD card in the first place. Remove the SD card, insert in card reader, delete the andboot folder, or the contents of the folder, ( may be wise to have a spare SD with either a winmo or android install handy at this point, just in case things go horribly wrong ).
Now with the cleaned SD, put it in the phone and boot, it should boot fine, IF the data is truly on the EXT2 partition.
That at least will answer one question, namely, where the heck is my data?
If this works fine, then I'd just put it down to some inner weirdness of android on non-native devices, if it fails then I'm wondering if your EXT2 partition may have problems, forcing the phone to dump it on the first available good partition, namely the FAT32 one.
Oh and if it does fail, you will have to reinstall, since your data will be toast.
Finally, good luck, I await with interest
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Great idea, I'll try this on the weekend. I wont delete data though, I'll just rename andboot and backup data for good measure, because I want to be able to go back to the data by renaming it back if it doesn't work. I was also thinking if there is any way to get to the ext2 partition and read it... I'm on xp so I cant do it on my pc, and on the phone, I've looked around in astro n other file managers but cant see anything. But if the case is as golfnz34me points out, then I should just backup the data, and change the option to Fat32 in install and restore data. That should do the trick.
golfnz34me said:
As I recall, the install has the FAT32/Ext2 options incorrectly swapped. It has been this way for a while.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks, will check this out. If its true, then great, more speed for my /data! I wonder how I missed this, been going through these forums regularly...
Ok I checked it out, and golfnz34me is correct it seems.
But now I found a new problem. I backed up data, and in the installer, set the data to SDCard, and tried to restore data. It gives various errors like
Code:
cannot determine filesystem size
failed
failed to format
...some other lines...
losetup: /dev/block/loop2: no such device or address
I created the partition with Paragon partition manager, and after getting this error I rechecked in PPM. I reformated the partition, but still get the error. In PPM the partition drive letter isnt assigned. Or, the partition isnt the active partition. Can one of those be the problem? The volume name is Ext2. Im not very experienced in partitioning etc, apart from normal ntfs partition for new hds in windows, so I didnt play with any options. I dont have a linux system either. Any got any ideas? Any help would be appreciated alot!
Not sure about using partition managers other than gparted, afaik most people are using the Gparted live cd if they don't have a linux install handy.
The errors all point to some sort of problem with the EXT2 partition, or it's formatting.
Also EXT2 partitions do not have drive letters, nor do they have to be active partitions.
Apps and data on SD card.
I cant seem to figure out how to make all the apps and other stuff install to the SD card. Do I have to partition the card into two partitions? or is there a way to install the system to Nand and make all the apps and data go to the SD card? Ive tried setting it to System on nand and data on SD partition but it says no partitions to install to or something.
Hi all
First of all, I am not talking about an A2SD partition or similar. What I would like to do is use an SD card formatted using Ext2/3 as normal "user storage" on my Defy.
Looking into it, people have tried and failed at this before. I believe there may be something inside the android code which expects FAT32. If so, I think this is a bad design. It can mount and use ext2/3, so why could I not use it for my data?
I am just backing up my SD card at the moment so I can experiment. I see no real reason it should not work (unless, as I said, it is hard-coded) so long as the permissions are dealt with correctly. Before I start, though, I was wondering if
anyone has managed to get this to work, and
does anyone have any thoughts?
Thanks all
drmouse81 I assume the ext2/3 SD CARD partition won't be loaded automatically since the partition type is set to VFAT (/dev/block/mmcblk0p1) in /etc/fstab. Therefore you'll have to format your SDCARD first and then you'll have to update the entry in your fstab file. In theory it should work, but I haven't tested.
Apologies if this has been resolved before, but I've been seeing two download folders in my SD card "downloads" and "Downloads." I've tried deleting one but I get an error - this also confuses Recovery when I try to flash a file located in one of the directories it typically looks in the wrong one. Has anyone had this or resolved it?
pongalong said:
Apologies if this has been resolved before, but I've been seeing two download folders in my SD card "downloads" and "Downloads." I've tried deleting one but I get an error - this also confuses Recovery when I try to flash a file located in one of the directories it typically looks in the wrong one. Has anyone had this or resolved it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have the issue and have just learned to deal with it. I don't really know when it why it happened, sometime around when I first flashed jellybean I think. Idk. Just letting you know you're not alone. Btw the "download" folder appears first in recovery. I move all my roms and kernels there. The "Download" is the folder all the general downloads end up in for me... at least I think... it's confusing but a sms issue to me.
DARKSIDE
I made a folder called Aaroms. It goes alphabetical and capital letters first so that folder is always on the top of the list. I then sort my roms mods and kernels with sub folders.
If you keep your (D)download folder clean and sorted it should be easy to know which one has what
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda premium
This is just speculation, but...
1. I think the virtual sdcard (sdcard0) and its links exists to make the real "sdcard" (/data/media) look like fat to apps instead of ext, which it really is (because it doesn't have a separate partition to itself). Most apps only know how to write to fat on the sdcard.
2. To programs that expect to be writing to fat, "download" and "Download" are the same directory, so they can be careless how they spell it when they access it or create it. But since the real filesystem is ext, they get created as two different directories. Maybe through some case-checking bug in the virtual sdcard or some program that writes directly to /data/media.
3. What I wound up doing was taking all my data out of both directories, deleting one, and making sure the remaining one was named "directory". Then I put all my data back in that one and everything has been good since then.
Well this is Linux after all. Downloads != downloads
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda premium
Need help too
pongalong said:
Apologies if this has been resolved before, but I've been seeing two download folders in my SD card "downloads" and "Downloads." I've tried deleting one but I get an error - this also confuses Recovery when I try to flash a file located in one of the directories it typically looks in the wrong one. Has anyone had this or resolved it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have the same issue. I have two Download folders. The thing is that the one with the small "D" (download), it is empty, and when I try to delete it, it always reappear.
Help!
this was anwsered like 2 days ago.
sent from my i9250
bk201doesntexist said:
this was anwsered like 2 days ago.
sent from my i9250
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I cant find the post telling the answer. Lol. The last post isbin october 2010.
strumcat said:
1. I think the virtual sdcard (sdcard0) and its links exists to make the real "sdcard" (/data/media) look like fat to apps instead of ext, which it really is (because it doesn't have a separate partition to itself). Most apps only know how to write to fat on the sdcard.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think that the symlinks are there just for backwards compability issues with apps, that look under /sdcard/ mount point. it doesn't have anything to do with fs, android never used fat, or ntfs; known fs in android are yaffs2, ext4 and maybe a few proprietary ones like sammy's rfs.
bk201doesntexist said:
I think that the symlinks are there just for backwards compability issues with apps, that look under /sdcard/ mount point. it doesn't have anything to do with fs, android never used fat, or ntfs; known fs in android are yaffs2, ext4 and maybe a few proprietary ones like sammy's rfs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The real sdcards were formatted as fat, and most apps that used them to store data only knew how to read/write a fat fs. I found this out by creating a mountable volume on a real sdcard on my old phone. It mounted as a directory on the sdcard. If I formatted the volume as fat, all my apps could use it normally. If I formatted it as ext(anything), a few apps could use it but most could not.
The symlinks are for backwards compatibility, but I believe the fuse filesystem virtual sdcard0 exists to make ext4 look like fat to all apps and to windows.
Note that if the gnex "sdcard" had its own partition, it could be formatted as fat and mounted as USB external storage like a real sdcard. I don't know, but it seems like Google went out of their way to prevent that.
The Google line is that the gnex sdcard shares an ext4 partition to maximize space, ie no unused wasted space on two partitions. But that is pretty farfetched, since the number of problems caused by this arrangement is huge in proportion to the "space saved" which is negligible.
Obviously, the real reason for this kludged-up mess is to discourage local storage/backup and encourage cloud storage, which can then be monetized.
strumcat said:
The real sdcards were formatted as fat, and most apps that wrote data to it only knew how to write it to a fat fs. I found this out by creating a mountable volume on a real sdcard on my old phone. It mounted as a directory on the sdcard. If I formatted the volume as fat, all my apps could use it normally. If I formatted it as ext(anything), a few apps could use it but most could not.
The symlinks are the for backwards compatibility, but I believe the fuse filesystem virtual sdcard0 exists to make ext4 look like fat to all apps and to windows.
Note that if the gnex "sdcard" had its own partition, it could be formatted as fat and mounted as USB external storage like a real sdcard. I don't know, but it seems like Google went out of their way to prevent that.
The Google line is that sdcard shares ext4 partition to maximize space, is no unused wasted space on two partitions. But that is pretty farfetched, since the number of problems caused by this arrangement is huge in proportion to the "space saved" which is negligible.
Obviously, the real reason for this kludged-up mess is to discourage local storage/backup and encourage cloud storage, which can then be monetized.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
sure, i was talking about nand storage. still, if apps really depend on that to survive (said "fat compability"), it's unlogical to me coming from linux, where several fs can co-exist, as you may know.
if sdcard had its own partition like you say, and it could be formatted to fat, it would suck from a performance point of view, right? because its way slower than ext4 or yaffs2?
sent from my i9250
bk201doesntexist said:
sure, i was talking about nand storage. still, if apps really depend on that to survive (said "fat compability"), it's unlogical to me coming from linux, where several fs can co-exist, as you may know.
if sdcard had its own partition like you say, and it could be formatted to fat, it would suck from a performance point of view, right? because its way slower than ext4 or yaffs2?
sent from my i9250
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sure, Android knows how to read/write fat as well as ext. But I guess the app devs figured sdcards would be fat forever. so they only included fat I/O in their apps.
Yes, ext4 is better than fat. But fat+mass-storage is far better and faster than ext4+fuse+mtp. For example, an sdcard backup from fat mounted as mass storage to a pc is much faster and more reliable than an sdcard backup using mtp. MTP backups are painfully slow and often won't even complete due to errors.
strumcat said:
Sure, Android knows how to read/write fat as well as ext. But I guess the app devs figured sdcards would be fat forever. so they only included fat I/O in their apps.
Yes, ext4 is better than fat. But fat+mass-storage is far better and faster than ext4+fuse+mtp. For example, an sdcard backup from fat mounted as mass storage to a pc is much faster and more reliable than an sdcard backup using mtp. MTP backups are painfully slow and often won't even complete due to errors.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well it still happens in 2017 running Android 7.1.2 lol
Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk
I'm not exactly new to linux, or android, but I'm not familiar with how android treats external storage vs. internal.
I had advised a few people to format their external drives as ext4 since the kernel would probably support it (and the system, data and cache partitions are ext4 so it DOES). However, when I format my external storage (32gb and 1gb USB sticks) to ext*, it doesn't show up, even in the logcat or in ES File Explorer (or a mount command, but with no root or fdisk -l i didn't dig too far).
So I was wondering if anyone happens to know why thats the case. Clearly the kernel supprots ext4, but you can't mount external storage with it?
FYI, so far that I've seen, I can't format external storage with the ouya. It also only supports NTFS read, and FAT32 R/W.
kill-9 said:
I'm not exactly new to linux, or android, but I'm not familiar with how android treats external storage vs. internal.
I had advised a few people to format their external drives as ext4 since the kernel would probably support it (and the system, data and cache partitions are ext4 so it DOES). However, when I format my external storage (32gb and 1gb USB sticks) to ext*, it doesn't show up, even in the logcat or in ES File Explorer (or a mount command, but with no root or fdisk -l i didn't dig too far).
So I was wondering if anyone happens to know why thats the case. Clearly the kernel supprots ext4, but you can't mount external storage with it?
FYI, so far that I've seen, I can't format external storage with the ouya. It also only supports NTFS read, and FAT32 R/W.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've asked this question too, I tried with different harddrives to all the ext formats and nothing picks it up. there are a few apps like ntfs mounter which supports ext but requires rooting.
Android only recognises FAT32 and I think CDFS and UDF. May also recognise FAT16. NTFS and exFAT are both patented so need expensive licenses for a manufacturer to include them in devices (a few do on their modified firmwares).
I have no idea why ext isn't supported though. I presume it is something to do with the relative rarity of ext drives outside of Linux boot devices.
SixSixSevenSeven said:
Android only recognises FAT32 and I think CDFS and UDF. May also recognise FAT16. NTFS and exFAT are both patented so need expensive licenses for a manufacturer to include them in devices (a few do on their modified firmwares).
I have no idea why ext isn't supported though. I presume it is something to do with the relative rarity of ext drives outside of Linux boot devices.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
isnt the internal memory ext4?
anyone who has there ouya rooted could you please try one of the harddrive mounting apks like paragon or ntfs mounter and see if the ext formats get picked up?
got ext3 working with usb otg helper app. You need root access.
No problem mounting ext4
Just made myself a 15GB ext4 formatted second partition on a 32GB usb drive. Just because Ouya only looks at the first partition, and assumes it's fat32 should not discourage you. Just open a adb shell to your Ouya, become superuser, create a directory /mnt/mydata, and mount it:
In adb shell:
1. su
2. mkdir /mnt/mydata
3. mount -t ext4 /dev/block/vold/8\:2 /mnt/mydata
kill-9 said:
I'm not exactly new to linux, or android, but I'm not familiar with how android treats external storage vs. internal.
I had advised a few people to format their external drives as ext4 since the kernel would probably support it (and the system, data and cache partitions are ext4 so it DOES). However, when I format my external storage (32gb and 1gb USB sticks) to ext*, it doesn't show up, even in the logcat or in ES File Explorer (or a mount command, but with no root or fdisk -l i didn't dig too far).
So I was wondering if anyone happens to know why thats the case. Clearly the kernel supprots ext4, but you can't mount external storage with it?
FYI, so far that I've seen, I can't format external storage with the ouya. It also only supports NTFS read, and FAT32 R/W.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not Actually True
SixSixSevenSeven said:
Android only recognises FAT32 and I think CDFS and UDF. May also recognise FAT16. NTFS and exFAT are both patented so need expensive licenses for a manufacturer to include them in devices (a few do on their modified firmwares).
I have no idea why ext isn't supported though. I presume it is something to do with the relative rarity of ext drives outside of Linux boot devices.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There is in fact a standard read-only NTFS driver in LInux, and it's supported on the OUYA. An NTFS-formatted USB hard drive automounts upon hot plugin.
I finally got a reply back from ouya support about ext3/4 not being recognized and they said its been resolved. Looking forward to the next firmware.
Initially Titanium Backup's "move to SD" feature looked like a great way to use tools I was already familiar with to make the most of limited internal storage. While searching for answers on how to set up what TB needed, it became clear that pretty much any similar app or solution - e.g. Mounts2SD - would need this partition mounted to function properly.
Problem is I can't seem to get it to work, despite trying EVERYthing that all of xda forums and Google can tell me. And there's a lot of info on this topic.
This is the mount command in Terminal emulator:
Code:
su
busybox mount -t ext4 /dev/block/mmcblk1p2 /sd-ext
(where I've confirmed that /dev/block/mmcblk1p2 is the partition I want to mount, ext4 is replaced by correct filesystem, and /sd-ext exists and is the desired mount point.)
It seems to go fine... I don't get any errors or feedback. But TB doesn't detect the partition even after adding an "app" folder using "mkdir" command.
Here's way more info than necessary about my situation in case it might help...
Device is SM-113, KK 4.4.4. Rooted, stock everything, selectively debloated using Titanium Backup Pro
Recovery is TWRP 3.0.0
Busybox by Stericson from Google Play
This is what I've done, in all possible combinations:
— Have used 3 separate SD cards: 32GB fresh out of the package (largest size officially supported by this tab) and 2 used 64GB (no documentation but it mounted and works fine for regular storage!)
— Used TWRP, AParted (from Play store) and Minitool (on Windows) to create the partitions
— 2nd partition formatted as ext2 & ext4 (read somewhere that ext3 wasn't a good idea...)
— Size of the 2nd partition ranging from less than 10% of SD card size up to 10GB
— Mounting to /sd-ext, /system/sd, and /data/sd (per TB's knowledgebase, linked above )
I've also attempted using a few apps from Google PIay as recommended by various threads on the subject from this forum (don't even remember which but I can look them up if necessary). I've since wiped and restored a nandroid backup so that none of these can potentially get in the way.
This IS working on my (also stock, MM 6.0.1) Galaxy S5 (G900W8) with one of the cards that didnt work on this tab - a 4GB ext4 partition on a 64GB SD card. After TB recognized it I set up init.d support and it happily mounts on every boot.
So it looks like it's something to do with this device, which sadly has extremely limited space that makes me want to cry. Therefore, I hope someone else with the 113 can lend a hand.
If necessary, I'm totally willing to flash stock, re-root, and set everything up again in order to make this work!
Not too sure. I use Aparted and Link2SD on a couple of my older toys...lol. I use ext 3 too. I have a 210, I'll play with it and see if I can figure it out.
Thanks @RealWelder! Don't know if that'll help as it's a different device, but let me know what, if anything, you figure out.
Personally, I'm going to give it another shot using the 'Mounts2SD' app (even though I'd wanted to do this WITHOUT any new apps... oh well, if it works at least I'll have plenty of space!)
I got it to work! *happy dance* Absolutely NO idea exactly what did it, but there was a lot of fiddling with permissions, and rebooting, and painfully typing "mount -t ext4 etc. etc." into terminal, and making adjustments to init.d scripts until finally ... TB recognized it.
Thank you XDA forum!
Sent from my Samsung SM-T113 using XDA Labs