Hi,
The edition of dos I am referencing builds upon the windows 98 dos
utilities, adding tools that are a good ten or 15 years later then the
official ones, so yes it is quite an improvement.
While I use Dos exclusively, I doubt I would ever need to put a file large
then 2gb on my computers. Speaking personally, cannot imagine what file
needs to be that large.
if i follow you though, the existing lfn I am running from ms Dos might be
safer then this doslfn.com program? because it does odd things to file
volumes?
if it is required for this elinks for dos build, I now wonder if it can
be loaded, just to run it, and removed via a .bat process.
Assuming I cannot solve my elinks is looking for a home location for its
config directory problem via another method.
Freebds does not work with either my screen reader, or most of the dos
programs I use, so am unsure of that context.
Thanks,
Kare
On Tue, 2 Jun 2026, Rugxulo via Freedos-user wrote:
Hi,
On Sun, May 31, 2026 at 8:01 PM Karen Lewellen via Freedos-user
<[email protected]> wrote:
I am running an enhanced edition of ms dos 7.1.
I would doubt that it's much (if any) different from the official
release(s). But maybe someone disassembled or patched something.
That includes its own lfn option, what specifically is dos lfn?
Win95 added an API for longer filenames up to 255 chars. (DJGPP 2.0
[GCC for DOS using DPMI] supported those out of the box.) Normally DOS
is restricted to 8.3, which many people (including developers) still
find restrictive. But so-called "long file names" (LFNs) only work
under the Win95 GUI, not under MS-DOS 7 proper.
DOSLFN.COM is a TSR that allows real DOS (like FreeDOS) to create and
find such "long file names" in a compatible way. (It's some weird hack
where DOS misuses the volume attribute for separate pieces of the file
name.)
HPFS from OS/2 was an improved file system (i.e. better than FAT), so
I always dreamed that FreeDOS would support it. But despite supporting
LFNs and being more efficient, you're still limited to 2 GB max file
size, and it's not journaled (thus still needing periodic file system
checks upon improper shutdown), so people weren't majorly interested.
Not enough of an improvement, I guess. (FreeBSD used to support it,
but I don't know if they ever added it back after making their file
system code reentrant.) Apparently OS/2 eventually moved to JFS
(journaled file system) to overcome such limitations.
_______________________________________________
Freedos-user mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
_______________________________________________
Freedos-user mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
