X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f
Date:	23 Sep 2003 14:29:26 +0200
Message-Id:	<u65jjy9g9.fsf@elta.co.il>
From:	Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT elta DOT co DOT il>
To:	"bdeck" <bdeck AT lycos DOT co DOT uk>
CC:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to:	<bkp8jo$164d$1@ulysses.news.tiscali.de> (bdeck@lycos.co.uk)
Subject:	Re: MOUNT.EXE
References:	<7ce56313 DOT 0309220111 DOT 61b9da4a AT posting DOT google DOT com> <bkmils$md3$1 AT nets3 DOT rz DOT RWTH-Aachen DOT DE> <bkp8jo$164d$1 AT ulysses DOT news DOT tiscali DOT de>
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

> From: "bdeck" <bdeck AT lycos DOT co DOT uk>
> Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp,comp.os.msdos.apps
> Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 13:00:09 +0200
> >
> > No... the whole idea behind mount doesn't exist in MS-DOS.
> 
> Very interesting... I have always wondered what it would take to make the
> virtual directory table on DJGPP ("i.e. /dev/env/DJDIR, /dev/d, /dev/c,
> /dev/com1, etc...) extensible.

They _are_ extensible; see the node "File System Extensions" in the
DJGPP library's reference docs.

However, such extensions are private to the program that uses them.
You cannot easily have a program like `mount' mount some pseudo-device
and have that device visible in another program, unless you leave
some record to that effect on disk or something.

> Perhaps a mock 'mount' and 'umount'
> executable could add additional devices and physical directories (even
> commands) to the DJGPP.ENV....

It would be a very bad idea IMHO to rewrite DJGPP.ENV to support this
kind of feature.  It's better to record the info on some other file.

- Raw text -