Date: Wed, 7 May 1997 14:21:57 -0400 (EDT) From: Pierre Phaneuf Reply-To: pierre AT tycho DOT com To: OpenDOS Mailing List Subject: Re: BIG suggestion for Opendos Features In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.16.19970507113652.35ef03e2@pop.verisim.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Precedence: bulk On Wed, 7 May 1997, Takashi Toyooka wrote: > You can quote spaces with backslashes, like this: > > mv File\ With\ Spaces.txt NewFileWithNoSpaces.txt > > Yuk. Embedding spaces into filenames is gross. One thing about Win95 > that really irked me is that some of the files had embedded spaces. > And Win95's use of double-quotation marks to specify embedded spaces > is worse than the use of backslashes. IMHO. Yuk indeed!!! This is horrible! > On the whole topic of case sensetivity that's been wracking this group, > I don't think there's any burning need to modify FAT. I think we all > agree that backward compatibility is vital to OpenDOS. If it can't run > legacy apps, it may as well be a whole new OS. Therefore, whether we > make some enhancement to FAT or not, the good old FAT will still have > to be around for people to use. I don't think much will happen to OpenDOS/16, apart maybe VFAT and a few improvements. OpenDOS/32 though will get a slew of improvement (ext2 is a memory hog compared to FAT!) and will have its own protected mode API. Program that calls the kernel through the current 16-bit real mode API will get an emulation (like complex permissions systems parsed to a simple "doesn't exist" (for file for which the user has no permissions), "read-only" and "read/write", depending on the users rights. A bit like OS/2 native calls and it's INT 21h services... > If you want backward compatibility, FAT is there to be used. If you > want long filenames, VFAT or ext2 is there. If you want to be Win95- > compatible, use VFAT. If you insist on cast-sensetivity, use ext2. > We can enhance FAT if we want to, of course, but I don't really see > the need. OpenDOS/16 will probably get hardcoded FAT and optional VFAT driver (or maybe hardcoded too) and nothing else. OpenDOS/32, should get installable file systems without any problems... > Having said that, Tim Bird's mention of an OO FS intrigues me. That's > an enhancement that may be worth making. I would love to see this idea > fleshed out. I think this is quite away from DOS for now! We'll see, we've got pretty imaginative people in here! ;-) Pierre Phaneuf