Mail Archives: opendos/1997/02/03/09:24:10
Ian AT darkblak DOT demon DOT co DOT uk wrote:
> dg AT dcs DOT st-and DOT ac DOT uk writes
>
> >The main thing that needs done, though, is the long filenames
> >interface.
> >
> >This doesn't look too hard, now, does it? Come on, someone could write a TSR
> >that implements it ...
>
> TSR? Are you on drugs? It would be far better if we were to compile
> the components that you want into IBMDOS.SYS ...
Until the sources are available (and in a cleaned-up format) a TSR
would be the way to go. It would not then take much more work to
move the relevant bits into the kernel at a later date.
The writing of such a TSR has been an occasional topic of discussion in
comp.os.msdos.4dos over the last year, but nothing has come of it,
perhaps because 4DOS is 'just a shell' and so not very
kernel-hackerish. With the input of the OpenDOS people, maybe
something will happen.
> And perhaps also go along the lines of Linux and have loadable modules
Especially if they're UNLOADABLE as well. No more of this rebooting
rubbish whenever I change CONFIG.SYS or AUTOEXEC.BAT. Maybe those
charming guys 'n' gals at Microsoft could do the same with NT ;-)
-- David Cantrell, http://www.eimages.co.uk/users/davidc/
Power is both corrupting and dangerous when unchallenged and
concentrated in the hands of the majority. Voices of tolerance
and compassion are easily drowned.
-- Akbar S. Ahmed
- Raw text -