Hi Tom, On Sun, 12 Sep 2004, tom ehlert wrote:
> the only real solution that comes to my mind is to undo the > alloc_fnode() change, even if that costs a few byte in low memory; > if you don't have UMB's, it even saves a few byte (the memory used by > the 2 near_fnodes) If you undo the change than all fnodes are in low RAM (near allocated). Now they're in the HMA (not UMB). If you don't have HMA it would save a few bytes indeed. There is really no need to allocate the near fnodes, they can simply be chosen fixed. That would require split_path and dir_open to take the near fnode as a parameter, etc, and e.g. dos_rename() to do: split_path(path2, fcbname, &fnode2); .... split_path(path1, fcbname, &fnode1); where fnode1 and fnode2 are the two near fnodes. This is the other real solution I can think of, it's a little more intrusive though. Bart ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: YOU BE THE JUDGE. Be one of 170 Project Admins to receive an Apple iPod Mini FREE for your judgement on who ports your project to Linux PPC the best. Sponsored by IBM. Deadline: Sept. 13. Go here: http://sf.net/ppc_contest.php _______________________________________________ Freedos-kernel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-kernel
