Message-Id: <199702022015.PAA28583@keeper.albany.net>
Comments: Authenticated sender is <jamesl AT mail DOT albany DOT net>
From: "Jim Lefavour" <jamesl AT mail DOT albany DOT net>
To: dg AT dcs DOT st-and DOT ac DOT uk, OpenDOS Mailing List <opendos AT mail DOT tacoma DOT net>
Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 15:08:57 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: Re: [opendos] OpenDOS + Win95 w/FAT32? 
Reply-to: jamesl AT albany DOT net
Sender: owner-opendos AT mail DOT tacoma DOT net
Precedence: bulk

> [...]
> >I think that OpenDOS should progress in a NEW direction, by adding
> >somehthing like ext2 support STANDARD.  It may not work with old
[snip]

I agree - the ext2 is the BEST fs that I have seen or heard of by 
far.  But to do this, we must first provide for current applications.

For example, these speech synthesizer programs are necessary for some 
to be able to use their computers at all, and I wouldn't want to lose 
the use of any of my current DOS programs - none of them are 
antiques, but some use timers and PM (IE. DOOM2, MW2) and some are 
WINGPF  3.11 (16bit) apps (most noteably my entire internet 
connectivity package).  We need not only to provide a superior fs, 
but also to provide TRANSPARENT translation for programs accessing 
it.

> 
> We already have an IFS layer. CD drivers, network devices, InterLink
> all use it. Compatability here isn't a problem. Nearly everything
> will run from one of these --- the number of programs that *have* to
> run on a FAT drive will be very small to non-existant.

Generally, I have to aggree with that...

> 
> The main thing that needs done, though, is the long filenames
> interface. From Ralf Brown's interrupt list:
> 
>  MS-DOS 7 (Chicago) - LONG FILENAME FUNCTIONS
> 
>  AH = 71h
>  AL = function
>  0Dh reset drive
>  39h create directory
>  3Ah remove directory
>  3Bh set current directory
>  41h delete file
>  43h get file attributes (BL=00h), set file attributes (BL=01h)
>  47h get current directory
>  4Eh find first file
>  4Fh find next file
>  56h move (rename) file
>  6Ch create/open file
> 
> This doesn't look too hard, now, does it? Come on, someone could
> write a TSR that implements it on top of FAT, either as VFAT or
> using look-up files without much difficulty.

A TSR wouldn't address the weakness of the current FS, and could 
cause problems. For example, lookup tables result in a multitude of 
files that have totally meaningless names, and the loss or corruption 
of that tsr would make the disk a maze to the average user.  It would 
be best to use an FS that naturally supports LFN and perform only 
translation (ie function call <-> native function call and space to 
dot if necessary, etc...).

I would LOVE to use ext2fs, and maintain the ability to run W3.11 and 
Dos programs, but also, I would like to see a utility like presizer 
or a converter for them - if I change over, why have both an MSDOS 
partition and an OpenDOS partition? that is if OpenDOS is working 
properly...

Jim, the LongWinded - In need of GOOD sigs!

jamesl AT albany DOT net or http://www.albany.net/~jamesl/
God established rules over men; civil rulers are subject to God; civilrulers will be judged by God. - George Washington