From:	jdashiel AT eagle1 DOT eaglenet DOT com
Date:	Sun, 2 Feb 1997 00:18:32 -0500 (EST)
To:	jamesl AT albany DOT net
Cc:	OpenDOS Mailing List <opendos AT mail DOT tacoma DOT net>
Subject:	Re: [opendos] OpenDOS + Win95 w/FAT32?
In-Reply-To:	<199702020421.XAA26504@keeper.albany.net>
Message-Id:	<Pine.NXT.3.95.970202001730.27399C-100000@eagle1>
Mime-Version:	1.0
Sender:	owner-opendos AT mail DOT tacoma DOT net

Why not make the fat 32 an I.F.S?  Then this way if it's
supplied users can decide which way they'd like to go.
On Sat, 1 Feb
1997, Jim Lefavour wrote:

> Hi...
> 
> > Once upon a time (on  2 Feb 97 at 1:53) dg AT dcs DOT st-and DOT ac DOT uk said:
> > 
> > > [...]
> > > >> Dunno whether it works as FAT32 is not here at the time. It
> > > >> will be released with Windoze 96 (or whatever they call it)
> > > >> AFAIK.
> > > >
> > > >Actually, Win95 OEM Service Release 2 has FAT32 built in.
> [snip]
> > > It doesn't even have automatic defragmenting!
> > All true, but OpenDOS will *have to* stay compatible with FAT, and
> > if we want it to be *the best*, then we have to support FAT32 as
> > well.
> 
> Yes, we need to be in the competition with the other "DOS" systems, 
> which of course includes WINDoze 95.  So, unfortunately, we need to 
> support FAT32.  I am only an intermediate programmer, so can it be 
> made so that the Linux Ext2FS is used with a "transparent" 
> translation for programs expecting FAT32?  That perhaps we could have 
> (eventually) an FS that supports DOS programs, WINDOZE programs, and 
> WIN95 programs simultaneously?  With a User-customizable GUI...  
> wait, I am getting ahead of things a bit here, aren't I?
> 
> Jim ;-)
> 
> jamesl AT albany DOT net or http://www.albany.net/~jamesl/
> One of the greatest delusions in the world is the hope thst the evils ofthis world can be cured by legislation. - Thomas B. Reed
> 
> 


jude <jdashiel AT eagle1 DOT eaglenet DOT com>

- Raw text -