Hi, On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 11:02 AM Joe Forster/STA <s...@c64.rulez.org> wrote: > > > doslfn ... not sure if it's free/libre, but it's widely used. Of > > course, there are other alternatives, too, of varying quality (e.g. > > StarLFN). > > There's no able alternative for DOSLFN. > Honestly, I think we can't afford to omit DOSLFN from the distribution.
I agree that DOSLFN is quite useful, so it shouldn't be totally discarded, if at all possible. (What about LFNDOS, ever tried that? Or maybe we need to finally add full LFN support into the kernel by default?) > (StarLFN isn't one as it doesn't actually support VFAT, only storing > long filenames in a file per directory, a la UMSDOS.) I thought it was optional? Or at least partial? Anyways, the "storing in a file" is still useful too, and that's what I often use in (very minor, unofficial) testing of FPC's ppcross8086.exe (under HX). Better than nothing. _______________________________________________ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
