But now after reading your request several times I suddenly guessed that what you say is that it can boot but not use it for saving.
That is more or less correct.
For booting, PPR (tce= ) and to save/restore backup; but
not for any other way to save scattered files, e.g. home=.
So I should make a ext2 for to be able to save on it from TCE.
No such need to save extensions and backup,
unless you insist on saving scattered files.
The reason me did not make ext2 was that I plan to ahve NTFS-3g which puppy use and one save in a Squash file so no need to have it in Ext2 or 3. Knoppix save that way too. So TCL should also be able to?
1. Puppy may have a capability to use NTFS, but such is certainly not a requirement.
2. AFAIK, Puppy is creating persistence in frugal install mode with a ext2/3 loop file, so it still uses a Linux filesystem, even if that is located on top of a non-native filesystem. I could imagine that Knoppix could have a similar approach.
AFAIK a loop file used to be supported by TC, but it escapes me if that is still the case currently, someone else might know.
Fat32 allow me to boot a Linux but Fat32 don't allow TCE to use the boot codes that I used. That I mixed up these two things as you say.
Have I finally get what you tried to say?
Yes, any frugal Linux install can be booted from FAT32, but files can not be stored directly on FAT*, which those boot codes would do.
I wonder why you do not just use the default mode with backup/restore and PPR (tce=) as described in documentation; that works perfectly well to achieve persistence with one single FAT* filesystem.