Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 08:53:24 +0300 (IDT) From: Eli Zaretskii X-Sender: eliz AT is To: salvador cc: djgpp AT delorie DOT com, djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: X-DOS: anybody knows about it? (small free DOS) In-Reply-To: <3988750B.3823E163@inti.gov.ar> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk On Wed, 2 Aug 2000, salvador wrote: > I want to know if anybody uses it I do use PC-104 on my daytime job, but with another OS. I don't know anything about X-DOS. > until now I found only one incopatibility > with djgpp (I guess there are more). Is quite funny, but this DOS does *not* > invent the stupid ". " and ".." entries for the root directory No version of DOS known to me has the "." and ".." entries in the root directory; try "dir c:\" and see. They are invented by the DJGPP library inside the `readdir' function. The logic that decides whether these two entries need to be faked is in the function __set_need_fake_dot_dotdot that is defined on opendir.c in the library. Perhaps that logic fails for some reason with this version of DOS. > it makes my > editor to fail to display the contents of the root directory, ls also fails. > According to ls the error is EACCES I'm not sure this failure is due to those fake entries. Why should the absence of "." cause directory listing to fail? Can you describe more details (like what library function fails, and where exactly)?