Sender: Alain Borel <aborel AT pcbch3207h DOT unil DOT ch>
From: Alain Borel <aborel AT icma DOT unil DOT ch>
Subject: Re: The future of Djgpp
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
References: <Pine DOT SGI DOT 3 DOT 96 DOT 971021155227 DOT 6596B-100000 AT gibson DOT eee DOT upd DOT edu DOT ph>
Lines: 23
NNTP-Posting-Host: pcbch3207h.unil.ch
Message-ID: <344f57b4.0@cisun2000.unil.ch>
Date: 23 Oct 97 13:57:08 GMT
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Precedence: bulk

Orlando Andico <orly AT dilnet DOT upd DOT edu DOT ph> wrote:
: > It's not Windows that's at fault, it's whoever produced the CD.  A CD
: > that needs to support both short and long file names needs to be
: > burned with Joliet extensions to the CD format.  I've seen several CDs
: > made that way, and I can report that the long names there were seen by
: > Windows 95, Windows NT and DJGPP programs (e.g., `ls') when they run
: > on Windows 95.

: What are these "Joliet extensions?" another Micro$oft "invention"? why
: aren't Rock Ridge extensions good enough for them, anyway? or is Rock
: Ridge the same thing as Joliet?

Hello!

Guess what? they're not the same... It seems that indeed Rock Ridge wasn't
good enough for them; they had to come up with a "standard" of their own.
Win95 as far as I know doesn't understand Rock Ridge extensions (but if
it does, can someone tell me how? I'd love to be able to access my Linux
CD's from Win95...)

Alain Borel
<Alain DOT Borel AT icma DOT unil DOT ch>