Date:	Thu, 3 Aug 2000 08:53:24 +0300 (IDT)
From:	Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender:	eliz AT is
To:	salvador <salvador AT inti DOT gov DOT ar>
cc:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com, djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: X-DOS: anybody knows about it? (small free DOS)
In-Reply-To:	<3988750B.3823E163@inti.gov.ar>
Message-ID:	<Pine.SUN.3.91.1000803085304.10519A-100000@is>
MIME-Version:	1.0
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

On Wed, 2 Aug 2000, salvador wrote:

>   I want to know if anybody uses it

I do use PC-104 on my daytime job, but with another OS.  I don't know
anything about X-DOS.

> until now I found only one incopatibility
> with djgpp (I guess there are more). Is quite funny, but this DOS does *not*
> invent the stupid ". " and ".." entries for the root directory

No version of DOS known to me has the "." and ".." entries in the root
directory; try "dir c:\" and see.  They are invented by the DJGPP
library inside the `readdir' function.  The logic that decides whether
these two entries need to be faked is in the function
__set_need_fake_dot_dotdot that is defined on opendir.c in the
library.  Perhaps that logic fails for some reason with this version
of DOS.

> it makes my
> editor to fail to display the contents of the root directory, ls also fails.
> According to ls the error is EACCES

I'm not sure this failure is due to those fake entries.  Why should
the absence of "." cause directory listing to fail?  Can you describe
more details (like what library function fails, and where exactly)?

- Raw text -