Date: Thu, 27 Mar 1997 10:53:03 -0500 (EST) From: "Mike A. Harris" Reply-To: "Mike A. Harris" To: yeep AT xs4all DOT nl cc: opendos AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: running opendos with win 95 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Organization: Total disorganization. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Thu, 27 Mar 1997 yeep AT xs4all DOT nl wrote: > > > Not well. Win95 is more closely "knit" with MSDOS 7.0 than was > > > Windows 3.1 with earlier MSDOS versions. I believe it is possible > > > to dual boot them, but I think it is not possible (at the moment) > > > to boot Win95 on top of OpenDOS. I haven't set up dual booting > > > for Windows 95 (I have for Linux) but I understand that Win95 "resists" it. > > > Also, OpenDOS will not recognize or use long filenames. Under OpenDOS, > > > you will just see mangled directories and filename for anything longer > > > than 8.3. > > > > > btw i've heared a rumor that long filename api is not part of DOS 7 but > > part of "Windows" and does not appear until GUI is loaded.. Is that true > > or not? > > That would explain why you can't get LFN while you boot MS-DOS only. > If LFN is truly just a Win95 driver, than I think letting Win95 run of OD > can't be that hard, becuase of LFN is done by Win95 itself, then why > wouldn't other things be done by Win95 as well. This is a very good point you've raised Yeep. I guess now we find out exactly how closely tied 95 is to MSDOS eh? I still look at W95/DOS7 as a DOS7/Win4.0 combo and not as M$ wants us to believe. If you look at the MBR of a drive with 95 on it, it shows the text "MS-WIN 4.1" or something like that. Hmmm.... :o) Mike A. Harris | http://blackwidow.saultc.on.ca/~mharris Computer Consultant | Coming soon: dynamic-IP-freedom... My dynamic address: http://blackwidow.saultc.on.ca/~mharris/ip-address.html mailto:mharris AT blackwidow DOT saultc DOT on DOT ca Download OpenDOS, then: CDD C:\^DEL /ZS MSDOS.SYS IO.SYS \DOS\*.*