Message-Id: <199702042140.WAA16165@math.amu.edu.pl> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Mark Habersack" Organization: What? (Poznan, Poland) To: chambersb AT juno DOT com (Benjamin D Chambers) Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 22:39:28 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [opendos] OpenDOS + Win95 w/FAT32? Reply-to: grendel AT ananke DOT amu DOT edu DOT pl CC: OpenDOS Mailing List In-reply-to: <19970203.183342.4575.0.chambersb@juno.com> Sender: owner-opendos AT mail DOT tacoma DOT net Precedence: bulk Once upon a time (on 3 Feb 97 at 21:32) Benjamin D Chambers said: > On Sun, 2 Feb 1997 20:39:40 +0100 "Mark Habersack" > writes: > >Once upon a time (on 2 Feb 97 at 0:18) jdashiel AT eagle1 DOT eaglenet DOT com > >said: > > > >> Why not make the fat 32 an I.F.S? Then this way if it's > >> supplied users can decide which way they'd like to go. > >Coz there's no documentation of IFS interface. Besides it's an M$ > >standard > >and, as such, is being kept secret ;-)). I'd vote for developing an > >OpenDOS-specific format of such an installable FS driver (and one that can > >be dynamically loaded/unloaded without all that black magic needed to > >remove an installed SYS driver on DOS) > You mean... DOG LET'S YOU REMOVE A .SYS DRIVER?????? > Who'd of guessed??? I thought M$'s policy was "It worked for you > yesterday - if you don't want it there anymore/it's not working anymore, > then YOU're the one that has a bug, cause OUR stuff is great!" Oh yes, it does allow you to do that. Only you have to dig deep down in the innards of our beloved M$-DOG. ******************************************************** For when it comes down to it there's no use trying to pretend. For when it comes down to there's no one really left to blame - blame it on me, you can blame it on me We're just sugar mice on the rain. ---- Visit http://ananke.amu.edu.pl/~grendel