Am 07.11.22 um 14:07 schrieb Joseph Norton:
Hi listers:
I’m just curious about how you all feel about the use of lfn in FreeDOS (or any
real DOS).
Before you read on: FreeDOS 1.1 was the last version I actually used...
(Didn't find the time...)
For FreeDOS I think that LFN should be in the kernel. There should be a
LFN=ON or LFN=OFF CONFIG.SYS statement telling the kernel to either
stick to 8.3 or to enable LFN on FAT.
I also think that FreeDOS should natively support exFAT and UEFI.
Why?
Because if I wanted to use an old version of DOS that needs a BIOS and
that needs FAT16, I could use any MS-DOS, PC DOS or DR-DOS... (with
FAT32 support in Enhanced DR-DOS as well...)
Modern would be to at least support current hardware. For that, there's
IMHO a necessity for
1. UEFI (no more CSM since around 2020 means no more BIOS...)
2. exFAT (for large disks)
3. LFN (for real-life filenames)
4. simple SATA/ATA TRIM
on bare hardware.
I always wanted to install FreeDOS on real hardware, on my 486DX-50 to
be precise, but I didn't find the time... I own DR DOS 5.0, even have
the original box it came in, so I might just go with that instead. Also,
since this historic hardware is limited by design (504 MB HDD BIOS
limit) there's no need for a newer file system than FAT16, there's also
no need for all those drivers that are part of FreeDOS for modern
hardware. I'll also be happy with short filenames on such a retro system...
BTW, back in the days I used 4DOS, which had descript.ion support (or
rather invented it). With it, one could easily manage without LFN, as
long as 4DOS was used instead of COMMAND.COM.
Might be an idea to put native support in FreeDOS COMMAND.COM for
descript.ion as well....
Just my 2¢.
A.
_______________________________________________
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
