From: mharris AT blackwidow DOT saultc DOT on DOT ca Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1997 14:35:58 -0500 (EST) Reply-To: mharris AT blackwidow DOT saultc DOT on DOT ca To: Mark Habersack cc: OpenDOS Mailing List Subject: [opendos-developer] Re: [opendos] OpenDOS + Win95 w/FAT32? In-Reply-To: <199702022234.XAA22397@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 Sun, 2 Feb 1997, Mark Habersack wrote: Moved from [opendos] > > Just one provision: Make it an IFS, rather than fixed in, so you can > To make things clear: by saing IFS do we refer to the way the driver is > installed or rather to the M$ standard of drivers? When I say IFS, I mean that ANY program can access files/directories on the disk regardless of the underlying FS through a single API interface. A name mangler will be present on the old DOS 8.3 interface to allow legacy apps to use files on the new FS's. Filesystems can be added on the fly by doing something like this: MOUNT Where is the partition name, I don't know what syntax would be appropriate in DOS for this, but I'm sure that either one allready exists, or will be created. A possibility is to use the UNIX syntax - the "/dev/" part ie: HDA3:, SDA4: is where you want the drive to appear, either a drive letter "F:" or a directory "C:\MNT", and would decide HOW to mount it, as well as what type, ie: /T=ext2 or /TYPE=HPFS or whatever, and /RO (read only) /RW (read write), etc... Very flexible if you ask me. An OLD application would get mangled names from the new FS's (for files that don't allready fit in 8.3 format) and unmangled names that DO fit in unmangled format. ALSO, it will be GREAT to have CASE SENSITIVITY in DOS FINALLY!!!!!!!!!!!! A NEW application could either use the old interface and stick with 8.3, or could use the NEW interface and use or create LFN's symlinks, hardlinks, whatever, for file handling. I'm getting excited just talking about it!!!!! I CANT WAIT!!!!!!!!!! From a compiler perspective, which API should be used in apps? Well, to make the API transparent, the C lib would use code which would check for the existence of the IFSAPI, and if present for a drive, use it, if not, it would fall back to the 8.3 format. That way a program need not even be concerned what API is being used. If a user is prompted for a filename, and they enter "VeryLong Filename with spaces" and the current DIR/DRIVE or whatever isn't under the IFSAPI, then an error "Invalid filename" will just be reported back like any legacy app would do. *IF* the current DIR/DRIVE *IS* an IFS drive, then the save would work ok. (Although I discourage using spaces in filenames as they are a big PAIN!!!!!! Also, the "!" is even a BIGGER pain!! ) > > (optionally ;-) add whichever file systems you want. By default, the > > kernel (IBMBIO/IBMDOS) would load up the equivelant of: > > > > IFS=C:\OpenDOS\FAT.IFS > Or just a mount/umout utility to do that. Yes, who wants to edit config.sys and reboot to add a new FS. Don't forget, that adding a FS doesn't mean adding a PHYSICAL DRIVE to the system. Networked drives (NFS) could be being added. MOUNT/UNMOUNT seems the way to go. > > Oh, and please; whoever does this, can we keep the low memory usage down to > > an absolute friggin' minimum, and stick it in EMS/XMS? ;-) > With DPMS it is possible to write a driver that'll work entirely in PMode and > will reside in the XMS - is that all right with you? ;-) Yep, sounds good to me! > > Also, native support of the INT 21/71 functions which allow DOS apps to use > > the long filenames. Unfortunately, under Win95, these only work when > That's a must! I can't imagine any other way to do that. If we add the > support, let's make it better than M$ did, am I right? DEFINATELY!!! Also, I think that the MS VFAT/LFN's should be available under the NEW IFSAPI as well. Lets not treat ANY FS any different. > > Windows is loaded.... What were M$ thinking? No, don't tell me. > > They want you to use the Win95 DOS shell, rather than DOS 7.00, and since > When you use the GUI you're still in DOS anyway... Yah, '95 is a hack and a crock. Lets make OD go in a NEW direction and make it really powerful! 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 Want a Windows emulator for Linux? Visit Caldera's website: www.caldera.com