Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2001 19:24:00 +0300 (IDT)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender: eliz AT is
To: =?iso-8859-2?Q?Wojciech_Ga=B3=B1zka?= <wojciech DOT galazka AT polkomtel DOT com DOT pl>
cc: "'djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com'" <djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com>
Subject: Re: ODP: Win2K/XP fixes - implementation review
In-Reply-To: <250B3114DA16D511B82C00E0094005F8023FC0CF@MSGWAW11>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1010827192123.22538P@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
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


On Mon, 27 Aug 2001, =?iso-8859-2?Q?Wojciech_Ga=B3=B1zka?= wrote:

> But what do you mean by " NT 4 + LFN
> is forced to make a lot of extra calls which aren't required." Which ones ?

Charles meant to say that the NT4+NTLFN combo is treated by the 
work-arounds as if it were W2K or XP.  These work-arounds issue 
additional DOS calls, which are completely unnecessary in the case of 
NTLFN, since its LFN support doesn't have any of the bugs we found in 
W2K.

So we simply punish NTLFN users, for no good reason (well, there is a 
reason: the way we detect W2K cannot distinguish between these two system 
configurations).