Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 16:02:21 +0200
From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Sender: halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il
To: Martin DOT Stromberg AT lu DOT erisoft DOT se
Message-Id: <2427-Wed16Aug2000160221+0300-eliz@is.elta.co.il>
X-Mailer: Emacs 20.6 (via feedmail 8.2.emacs20_6 I) and Blat ver 1.8.5b
CC: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to: <200008161238.OAA09506@lws256.lu.erisoft.se> (message from Martin
	Stromberg on Wed, 16 Aug 2000 14:38:13 +0200 (MET DST))
Subject: Re: Patch: open() adjustment for symlinks
References:  <200008161238 DOT OAA09506 AT lws256 DOT lu DOT erisoft DOT se>
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

> From: Martin Stromberg <Martin DOT Stromberg AT lu DOT erisoft DOT se>
> Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 14:38:13 +0200 (MET DST)
> 
> suppose someone want to be able to handle umsdos extensions on FAT?

Sure, it's possible.  Right now, they will need to catch _open and
_read, and supply the contents of our symlink file.  If we think this
is too clumsy, we should provide a special FSEXT hook.