Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2001 14:34:53 +0300 (IDT) From: Eli Zaretskii Message-Id: <200108061134.OAA25586@is.elta.co.il> To: sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu (Charles Sandmann) CC: acottrel AT ihug DOT com DOT au, djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com In-reply-to: <10108052205.AA12321@clio.rice.edu> (sandmann@clio.rice.edu) Subject: Re: Windows 2000 /dev/null permission query References: <10108052205 DOT AA12321 AT clio DOT rice DOT edu> 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: sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu (Charles Sandmann) > Date: Sun, 5 Aug 2001 17:05:22 -0500 (CDT) > > Conclusion - LFN support in W2K is breaking things (like truncate, > utime, get_dev_info). Handles opened with the LFN calls are not being > treated the same as those opened with the old DOS APIs. Does function 7160/CL=01 (get short 8+3 name for a long file name) work reliably on W2K? If so, we could selectively modify functions like utime that open files and get trouble on W2K, to convert the long name to a short name and then use non-LFN functions to open the file. Only on W2K/XP, of course. We could also do this universally (on W2K/XP), in all functions that open files, but for that we will have first to see if opening a file with a legacy DOS function disables some LFN features when we pass a handle from a non-LFN open. For example, do functions 5704 and 5705 work on a handle open by a non-LFN DOS call? Another idea might be to use `dup' to duplicate a handle from an LFN open call, then see if that handle has the same problems with function 5701 as the original handle. (Since `dup' doesn't have an LFN analog, maybe the duplicated handle is created as a non-LFN one, who knows?)