Date:	Sun, 2 Feb 1997 18:47:19 -0600 (CST)
From:	"Colin W. Glenn" <cwg01 AT gnofn DOT org>
To:	jamesl AT albany DOT net
cc:	dg AT dcs DOT st-and DOT ac DOT uk, OpenDOS Mailing List <opendos AT mail DOT tacoma DOT net>
Subject:	Re: [opendos] OpenDOS + Win95 w/FAT32?
In-Reply-To:	<199702022015.PAA28583@keeper.albany.net>
Message-ID:	<Pine.GSO.3.95.970202183921.28922C-100000@sparkie.gnofn.org>
MIME-Version:	1.0
Sender:	owner-opendos AT mail DOT tacoma DOT net

On Sun, 2 Feb 1997, Jim Lefavour wrote:
> I agree - the ext2 is the BEST fs that I have seen or heard of by 
> far.  But to do this, we must first provide for current applications.

Well, how about finding a good middling ground, one which allows for
LFN's, but includes a bit of test code to _ensure_ that selected LFN's
contain a descent 8.3 name within?  To expand on this:

Say you have a fully qualified filename called:

> > [...]
> > >I think that OpenDOS should progress in a NEW direction, by adding
> > >somehthing like ext2 support STANDARD.  It may not work with old
> connectivity package).  We need not only to provide a superior fs, 
> but also to provide TRANSPARENT translation for programs accessing 
> [snip]

c:/thisone/second.level/real.filename.ext.z

Which the system will hand to a 8.3 program as:

c:\thisone\second.lev\realfile.z

Should you generate a file called:

c:/thisone/second.level/real.filelist.ext.z

The OS complains:

New filename conflicts with prior 8.3 name!

and shows you the conflict.  Should you chose to ignore the error, the
system informs you:

Warning! 8.3 programs will only see first occurance of file!

Is this workable?

- Raw text -