Message-Id: <199702042008.VAA13123@magigimmix.xs4all.nl>
From: "Yeep" <Yeep AT xs4all DOT nl>
To: "Colin W. Glenn" <cwg01 AT gnofn DOT org>
Cc: "OpenDOS Mailing List" <opendos AT mail DOT tacoma DOT net>
Subject: Re: [opendos] OpenDOS + Win95 w/FAT32? 
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 18:46:44 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
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. ;)

I forgive you ;-)

	Yeep

> 
> 
> > 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
> > 
>