Message-ID: <01FD6EC775C6D4119CDF0090273F74A4FD6A39@emwatent02.meters.com.au>
From: "da Silva, Joe" <Joe DOT daSilva AT emailmetering DOT com>
To: "'opendos AT delorie DOT com'" <opendos AT delorie DOT com>
Subject: RE: DR-DOS LFN detection?
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 09:56:07 +1100
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain
Reply-To: opendos AT delorie DOT com

Hi Matthias,

Thanks for confirming what I suspected ... I was/am looking at the
LTOOLS source code (to make this compatible with DR-DOS 6.0)
and noticed that it simply assumes LFN is available if running under
Windoze, otherwise not. If there was a "standard" way of detecting
LFN, I was going to change LTOOLS accordingly. However, I think
I'll leave this aspect of the code alone, rather than risk "breaking" it.

Joe.

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Matthias Paul [SMTP:Matthias DOT Paul AT post DOT rwth-aachen DOT de]
> Sent:	Sunday, March 09, 2003 11:49 PM
> To:	opendos AT delorie DOT com
> Subject:	Re: DR-DOS LFN detection?
> 
> On 2003-03-06, Joe da Silva wrote:
> 
> > Now, does anyone know what technique it uses to determine if an LFN
> > API is available? There doesn't seem to be any "installation check"
> > sort of sub-function listed under INT 21/71 (in Ralf Brown's interrupt
> > list).
> 
> You're right, there is no "install check" per se, but you can check
> the availability of the LFN API by carefully looking at the error
> return (Flags). RBIL61 has the details.
> 
> Greetings,
> 
>  Matthias
> 
> -- 
> <mailto:Matthias DOT Paul AT post DOT rwth-aachen DOT de>; <mailto:mpaul AT drdos DOT org>
> http://www.uni-bonn.de/~uzs180/mpdokeng.html; http://mpaul.drdos.org
> 
> "Programs are poems for computers."