Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 15:22:39 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Mark Habersack <grendel AT hoth DOT amu DOT edu DOT pl>
Reply-To: grendel AT hoth DOT amu DOT edu DOT pl
To: "Alaric B. Williams" <alaric AT abwillms DOT demon DOT co DOT uk>
cc: Lorier <lorier AT ihug DOT co DOT nz>, Matthias DOT Paul AT post DOT rwth-aachen DOT de,
        opendos-developer AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: Usage of directory entries
In-Reply-To: <861303632.1126299.0@abwillms.demon.co.uk>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSI.3.96.970418152206.22800C-100000@hoth.amu.edu.pl>
Organization: PPP (Pesticide Powered Pumpkins)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, 16 Apr 1997, Alaric B. Williams wrote:

> > know, but I think it overrides most of int 21h to do it.
> 
> Already been pointed out... we want a mounting system, definitely!
Yup!
  
> > Having a common interface to install ext2fs, umsdos, vfat, fat16, fat32 and
> > a file system for OpenDos. 
> 
> Uhuh. Not forgetting NFS.
That's a MUST!

> > I don't believe in corrupting fat anymore, any attempt that is made to add
> > "extensions" to it will be changed by M'soft to be as incompatible as
> > possible most likely, which is the closest you'll ever get to a complement
> > from them :)
> 
> Anecdote: I have a friend who has installed NT4.0 in an NTFS partition,
> and OS/2 in a HPFS partition. Now, Microsoft have made the interesting
> choice of using the same partition type code for NTFS as IBM use
> for HPFS... so in both systems, he gets an extra drive icon which claims
> to be unformatted if you access it, and asks if you really wanna format
> it.
> 
> That's blatantly evilness on Microsoft's part :-(
Or just an outrage!