From: mharris AT blackwidow DOT saultc DOT on DOT ca
Date: Sat, 15 Feb 1997 10:47:27 -0500 (EST)
Reply-To: mharris AT blackwidow DOT saultc DOT on DOT ca
To: Weiqi Gao <weiqigao AT crl DOT com>
cc: opendos AT mail DOT tacoma DOT net
Subject: Re: [opendos] BAD Filesystems
In-Reply-To: <199702151440.AA24720@mail.crl.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.95.970215104144.1839E-100000@capslock.com>
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 Sat, 15 Feb 1997, Weiqi Gao wrote:

> >Well, I figured if I said that we should USE the Linux FSSTND
> >that a bunch of people would say "Why not just use Linux", and I
> >am, and that isn't the point.  The point being that a standard
> >should be made so that software can expect things in certain
> >places.  The Linux FSSTND is a good candidate because it allready
> >exists, would facilitate porting from DOS -> Linux or the other
> >way around, it would eliminate the need for 10000 environment
> >variables or CONFIG.SYS or OPENDOS.INI entries.
> >
> >So now that you brought it up, I'll back it up by casting my vote
> >with yours.  Let's bring the Linux FSSTND to DOS.  (Added to
> >wishlist.)
> 
> One thing though: the Linux standard closely resembles the existing file
> system setup on the major Unix systems.  Therefore it is a simple matter of
> redefining some variables for software vendors to bring there product to
> the standard.  With DOS, most venders expect their product to be installed
> in one directory, usually a flat directory.  It will be awfully hard for
> anyone to bring their product to the standard. :(

No, you don't understand what I mean.  Shared libs don't exist in
DOS at all right now so adding them would be a NEW thing.  Any of
the NEW features coming to DOS should try and support the FSSTND.
This will aid the porting of many UNIX utilities and programs,
and make life much simpler to EVERYONE.  Legacy apps would still
run their normal way.  New apps could still run the old way too,
however developers would have a lot of advantages to adhere to a
standard such as FSSTND.  All config files go into \ETC, all
LIB's in \LIB, user installed programs in \USR\LOCAL\LIB, or in
something more DOSish such as \USR\APPS.

Most DOS programs don't NEED to use other directories, but those
that would benefit by it could follow the FSSTND.  Shared libs
will make this pretty much a good thing.


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

URL of the day: http://www.sun.com