Date: Wed, 23 Jul 1997 21:01:34 +1100
From: Bill Currie <billc AT blackmagic DOT tait DOT co DOT nz>
Subject: Re: LONGNAME.EXE and LS.EXE/CAT.EXE
In-reply-to: <s3d5c749.006@calderauk.com>
To: caldera-opendos AT caldera DOT com, opendos AT delorie DOT com, ttoyooka AT pobox DOT com,
        Edward HILL <ehill AT calderauk DOT com>
Message-id: <199707230906.VAA28297@teleng1.tait.co.nz gatekeeper.tait.co.nz>
Organization: Tait Electronics Limited
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Comments: Authenticated sender is <billc AT blackmagic DOT tait DOT co DOT nz>
Precedence: bulk

On 23 Jul 97 at 8:56, Edward HILL wrote:

> 
> It appears that DJGPP's LS.EXE and CAT.EXE cause LFN support to stop
> functioning.

It's not just those: make.exe does as well, I beleive (i'll have to 
try it out again).

> Currently LONGNAME.EXE supports four concurrent handles.
> 
> So... it looks like LS.EXE and CAT.EXE don't close the handle they
> are given.

Hmm, very plausible.


> 
> It could be that win95 automatically closes the hande when the
> enumeration is exhausted. If this is the case then the next version
> of LONGNAME.EXE will support this.

No, I think it would be better to have unlimited handles that get 
closed automatically when the program exits, Not so easy, I admit, 
but it should be possible by hooking int 20h and int 21h,ah=4ch and 
using the current psp (as dos does) to determine which handles to 
close.  The handles would of course have to be assosiated with a psp 
segment.

BTW is the source for longname.exe available and if not will it be 
(and when)?


Bill
--
Leave others their otherness.