Date: Mon, 3 Feb 1997 23:11:30 -0600 (CST)
From: "Colin W. Glenn" <cwg01 AT gnofn DOT org>
To: Yeep <Yeep AT xs4all DOT nl>
cc: jamesl AT albany DOT net, dg AT dcs DOT st-and DOT ac DOT uk,
        OpenDOS Mailing List <opendos AT mail DOT tacoma DOT net>
Subject: Re: [opendos] OpenDOS + Win95 w/FAT32? 
In-Reply-To: <199702032215.XAA24518@magigimmix.xs4all.nl>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.95.970203230645.6130D-100000@sparkie.gnofn.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-opendos AT mail DOT tacoma DOT net
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, 3 Feb 1997, Yeep wrote:
> > > c:/thisone/second.level/real.filename.ext.z
> > > Which the system will hand to a 8.3 program as:
> > > c:\thisone\second.lev\realfile.z
> > > Should you generate a file called:
> > > c:/thisone/second.level/real.filelist.ext.z
> > > The OS complains:
> > > New filename conflicts with prior 8.3 name!
> > > and shows you the conflict.  Should you chose to ignore the error,
> > > Warning! 8.3 programs will only see first occurance of file!
> > > 
> > Therein lies one problem with the lookup table approach - I have seen 
> > several packages using long "Linux" filenames in TGZ files, which use 
> > filenames that have large similar portions, viz.

I just realized this, I AM NOT PROPOSING LOOKUPTABLES.  The system uses a
fully qualified LFN, LFN aware program will use the LFN interrupts to get
the filenames as they are written to the harddrive directory.  8.3
programs would use the 'normal' interrupts and get 8.3 names in return,
hence the option of hooking the interrupt with a TSR which would give you
the chance on telling the OS which files you want to program to see.

much.clearer.now.hmm?

Sorry Yeep, I picked yours because it has my text in it. ;)


> Despite the fact that Windoze sucks (terribly!) it does handle the
> problem....pretty good (could be better, but I'm not smart enough to think
> of a better solution :-)  ).
> Whenever you have a file called "this_is_my_file" and a file called
> "this_is_my_file_too", windoze names the first file "this_i~1" and the
> second "this_i~2".
> Off course there is a downside to this, I have a directory which contains
> the files "d~1" to "d~a67fc7".
> But other than that, the solution works, all files are saved under
> different names.
> 
> 	Yeep
>