Mail Archives: opendos/1997/02/04/12:18:55
On Sun, 2 Feb 1997, Jim Lefavour wrote:
> > >I think that OpenDOS should progress in a NEW direction, by adding
> > >somehthing like ext2 support STANDARD. It may not work with old
> [snip]
>
> 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.
I agree fully. ext2 is fantastic.
> For example, these speech synthesizer programs are necessary for some
> to be able to use their computers at all, and I wouldn't want to lose
> the use of any of my current DOS programs - none of them are
> antiques, but some use timers and PM (IE. DOOM2, MW2) and some are
> WINGPF 3.11 (16bit) apps (most noteably my entire internet
> connectivity package). We need not only to provide a superior fs,
> but also to provide TRANSPARENT translation for programs accessing
> it.
Adding ext2 will not break any software. I'm running DOSemu and
have put a LOT of DOS software onto one of my Linux ext2
partitions. DOSemu comes with a command called LREDIR which
makes *ANY* Linux mounted filesystem available in DOS. Linux
long filenames show up in a shortened manner, ie:
lynx_bookmarks.html in Linux becomes LYNX_~PD.HTM in DOS.
The files work just fine too. I can mount ANY filesystem that
Linux supports and make it appear in DOS this way. File access
is transparent. Since the code allready exists to do this, and
to do it transparently, it will be easy to add it *NATIVELY* to
DOS. I think within 6 months we'll be laughing and enjoying full
ext2 access under plain ole dos. (gotta watch hitting the big red
SWITCH though!)
> > We already have an IFS layer. CD drivers, network devices, InterLink
> > all use it. Compatability here isn't a problem. Nearly everything
> > will run from one of these --- the number of programs that *have* to
> > run on a FAT drive will be very small to non-existant.
>
> Generally, I have to aggree with that...
Yah, but they all require 200k drivers loaded high and all use
different interfaces. Hardly an IFS if you ask me.
> > The main thing that needs done, though, is the long filenames
> > interface. From Ralf Brown's interrupt list:
I'll wait for ext2 thanks. No MS hacks on my system.
> > This doesn't look too hard, now, does it? Come on, someone could
> > write a TSR that implements it on top of FAT, either as VFAT or
> > using look-up files without much difficulty.
Looks scary!
> A TSR wouldn't address the weakness of the current FS, and could
> cause problems. For example, lookup tables result in a multitude of
> files that have totally meaningless names, and the loss or corruption
> of that tsr would make the disk a maze to the average user. It would
> be best to use an FS that naturally supports LFN and perform only
> translation (ie function call <-> native function call and space to
> dot if necessary, etc...).
Yes, I agree. It is even possible for the IFS to let W95 read
DOS mounted ext2 drives no? Couldn't a driver be written so that
W95 would run right of ext2?
> I would LOVE to use ext2fs, and maintain the ability to run W3.11 and
> Dos programs, but also, I would like to see a utility like presizer
> or a converter for them - if I change over, why have both an MSDOS
> partition and an OpenDOS partition? that is if OpenDOS is working
> properly...
presizer for ext2? Why? ext2 doesn't suffer from the large
partition == lots of wasted space blues.
Mike A. Harris | http://blackwidow.saultc.on.ca/~mharris
Computer Consultant | My webpage has moved and my address has changed.
My dynamic address: http://blackwidow.saultc.on.ca/~mharris/ip-address.html
mailto:mharris AT blackwidow DOT saultc DOT on DOT ca
DOS must have's: 4DOS 5.50c ftp://ftp.std.com/vendors/jpsoft
- Raw text -