From: mharris AT blackwidow DOT saultc DOT on DOT ca Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1997 00:00:12 -0500 (EST) Reply-To: mharris AT blackwidow DOT saultc DOT on DOT ca To: Mark Habersack cc: "Ian 'DrDebug' Day" , OpenDOS Mailing List Subject: Re: [opendos] OpenDOS + Win95 w/FAT32? In-Reply-To: <199702040034.BAA14920@math.amu.edu.pl> Message-ID: Organization: Total disorganization. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-opendos AT mail DOT tacoma DOT net Precedence: bulk On Tue, 4 Feb 1997, Mark Habersack wrote: > Once upon a time (on 2 Feb 97 at 17:19) Ian 'DrDebug' Day said: > > > 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. > > > > TSR? Are you on drugs? It would be far better if we were to compile > > the components that you want into IBMDOS.SYS (or whatever). This would > > provide the fastest system possible. > Nope. IBMDOS.COM should be kept as small as possible, and how do you imagine > adding up new file systems? Recompile IBMDOS.COM every time!? Only takes me an hour to recompile a Linux kernel. Recompiling a DOS kernel surely would only take 10-15 minutes. > > And perhaps also go along the lines of Linux and have loadable modules > > (a bit like VLMs). > Now, that's the way to go! But, once again, we have to develop a standard for > these drivers. Yep. Sounds good to me. With conditional compilation, one could compile support for a driver either directly into the kernel, or as a loadable module, or a dumb .SYS or .DRV file in config.sys. Mike A. Harris | http://blackwidow.saultc.on.ca/~mharris Computer Consultant | My webpage has moved and my address has changed. My dynamic address: http://blackwidow.saultc.on.ca/~mharris/ip-address.html mailto:mharris AT blackwidow DOT saultc DOT on DOT ca EMACS: Escape Meta Alt Control Shift :o)