X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f
From:	"Martin Str|mberg (ams AT ludd DOT luth DOT se) [via djgpp AT delorie DOT com]" <djgpp AT delorie DOT com>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: Fwd: A few DJGPP libc.a bugs
Date:	Fri, 13 May 2016 09:33:31 +0000 (UTC)
Organization:	Aioe.org NNTP Server
Lines:	24
Message-ID:	<nh4719$10ko$1@gioia.aioe.org>
References:	<56F8295E DOT 2090401 AT posteo DOT de> <571E4A50 DOT 3010806 AT iki DOT fi> <571E8166 DOT 1000103 AT gmx DOT de> <571EE412 DOT 6000005 AT iki DOT fi> <CAA-ihx914xS1qBNrR0Uii-jEm_-Q99LtbWHGmbjRj=azqidnaA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <152f7110-7932-a6db-30fd-afccd63822d4 AT iki DOT fi> <ngtd8c$vli$1 AT usenet DOT news DOT interia DOT pl> <83shxpavlp DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> <nh09kj$s6h$1 AT usenet DOT news DOT interia DOT pl> <83zirvajs4 DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> <nh3084$ebk$1 AT usenet DOT news DOT interia DOT pl> <837feya0hj DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> <nh43fq$m7l$1 AT usenet DOT news DOT interia DOT pl> <83posq8gjh DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	WLZdEp4S2PR09rkVF8ILdg.user.gioia.aioe.org
X-Complaints-To:	abuse AT aioe DOT org
User-Agent:	tin/2.2.1-20140504 ("Tober an Righ") (UNIX) (Linux/3.16.0-4-amd64 (x86_64))
X-Notice:	Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2
Bytes:	1813
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

"Eli Zaretskii (eliz AT gnu DOT org) [via djgpp AT delorie DOT com]" <djgpp AT delorie DOT com> wrote:
> > From: "Wiktor S. (wswiktorSP AT Mpoczta DOT fm) [via djgpp AT delorie DOT com]" <djgpp AT delorie DOT com>
> > Maybe it's enough to add one more step:
> > 
> > Instead of
> > 
> > >    . Otherwise, fail
> > 
> > do
> > 
> >     . Otherwise, use LFN
> >     . Otherwise, fail

> What will that do to legitimate failures on other types of volumes?

Obviously we don't know, but logical result would be fail. If we can't
open it by SFN it doesn't exist (except on exFAT) so we shouldn't be
able to open the non-existing file with the LFN either.

However, DOS' successors aren't logical.


-- 
MartinS

- Raw text -