Mail Archives: opendos/1997/03/10/02:25:00
On Sat, 15 Feb 1997, yeep wrote:
> > No, you don't understand what I mean. Shared libs don't exist in
> > DOS at all right now so adding them would be a NEW thing. Any of
> > the NEW features coming to DOS should try and support the FSSTND.
> > This will aid the porting of many UNIX utilities and programs,
> > and make life much simpler to EVERYONE. Legacy apps would still
> > run their normal way. New apps could still run the old way too,
> > however developers would have a lot of advantages to adhere to a
> > standard such as FSSTND. All config files go into \ETC, all
> > LIB's in \LIB, user installed programs in \USR\LOCAL\LIB, or in
> > something more DOSish such as \USR\APPS.
> >
> > Most DOS programs don't NEED to use other directories, but those
> > that would benefit by it could follow the FSSTND. Shared libs
> > will make this pretty much a good thing.
>
> Shared libs sound good and all.
> But I hate it when I have 500+ app's in one directory.
> If you want top delete an app you no longer use, you've got to do some
> seious searching to find out which binairies are for which app.
> We've gotta make one helluva good standard to please both Linux users and
> DOS users.
Don't know if I've replied to this yet or not, but....
Check out the MANIFEST directory in DJGPP, and also the
/var/log/packages dir in slackware. They hold a record of all
installed programs, and where they have been installed. This
makes uninstalling very trivial. Slackware's uninstall is smart
enough to check to see if more than one package uses the same
file too. This could easily be extended to DOS.
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
URL of the day: http://www.sun.com
- Raw text -