Date: Mon, 5 May 1997 22:51:13 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Mike A. Harris" <mharris AT blackwidow DOT saultc DOT on DOT ca>
Reply-To: "Mike A. Harris" <mharris AT blackwidow DOT saultc DOT on DOT ca>
To: John Fremlin <dfremlin AT facstaff DOT wisc DOT edu>
cc: opendos AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: Another look at FS notions
In-Reply-To: <cUobz8ew46tG092yn@facstaff.wisc.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.95.970505224144.9545s-100000@capslock.com>
Organization: Total disorganization.
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, 5 May 1997, John Fremlin wrote:

> The FS (filesystem) thread has been going on for many moons,
> and splitting itself into different subthreads. I feel that
> the time has come to clear the air.
> 
> To summarize and clarify, so that what has been said can
> be re-evaluated (if I miss something out, feel free to
> add it):
> 
>  1) General concensus that current dos filesystem
>      needs changing

Yes.
 
>  2) General concensus that long filenames, etc.
>      would be nice

Yes.
 
>     2.1) Suggestion that way to do this would be to use
>           4DOS DESCRIPT.ION method since it already exists
>           and is fairly simpile

No.  4DOS descriptions are simply that, file descriptions.  These
descriptions can contain characters which would be illegal in
filenames.  Implementing LFN's via the DESCRIPT.ION file would be
a slow hack, and would be very much the same way M$ went with
VFAT.  
 
>     2.3) Suggestion to use Linux (ext2) system or similar,
>           because it can do everything and is well
>           documented: general agreement on this point

Much better.  See my webpage for details:

http://blackwidow.saultc.on.ca/~mharris/ext2/index.html

>     2.4) Suggestion for filesystem that would be able to
>           use other OS's filesystems like the Mac's.

Yes, an IFS (installable filesystem) layer.  NOT the same as what
is allready there, but a NEW layer which provides for services
that do not currently exist in DOS.  The new services won't break
old programs, and a name mangler (ala mach) will present LFN's
and mixed case names to legacy apps for back-compatibility.

> >  3) Suggestion to asscociate data files with programs
>       (aka Windows)

Yes, 4DOS does this allready.  For example:

C:\> SET .WAV=C:\SB16\WPLAY.EXE
C:\> CATSCRM.WAV

WPLAY V1.00 Press esc to stop playback....

(The above is a simulated example not a screenshot.

IMHO these associations belong in the command interpreter, NOT in
the filesystem.  I can think of countless reasons why they
shouldn't be in the filesystem, and not a single reason why not
in the command processor.

Some other nice ones I have are:

SET .TXT=C:\UTILS\LIST.COM
SET .ME=C:\UTILS\LIST.COM
SET .1ST=C:\UTILS\LIST.COM
SET .DOC=C:\UTILS\LIST.COM
SET .MID=C:\UTILS\MIDIPLAY.EXE

This is all currently done with 4DOS.  It is old hat now (been
around for years).  It shouldn't be hard to put this into
COMMAND.COM.

TTYL

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
Email: mharris at blackwidow.saultc.on.ca  <-- Spam proof address

OpenDOS: The NEW DOS with FREE source code! http://www.caldera.com