Message-Id: <199703121418.IAA18119@topeka.cjnetworks.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 1997 08:21:17 -0600
From: "Jonathan E. Brickman" <brickman AT cjnetworks DOT com>
Reply-To: "Jonathan E. Brickman" <brickman AT cjnetworks DOT com>
To: opendos AT mail DOT tacoma DOT net
Subject: Re: [opendos] FSSTND
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-opendos AT mail DOT tacoma DOT net
Precedence: bulk

> DOS doesn't have symlinks yet.  Also, if we're going to have a
> standard, a symlink is kindof pointless.  symlinks could be used
> for legacy apps, which mostly would work under the new system
> anyway.  Most DOS apps don't have their directories hard coded
> into them.

Yes.  Hardcoded directory names is one of the things I find
most pointless and counterproductive about Unix.

Now, symlinks would be nice, but I'll settle for "mount".
I want to be able to mount all of my drives under one
hierarchy as well as A through Z.