Re: [Freedos-devel] DOSLFN bugfix explanations and ideas - was: FreeDO S Interim Build T2508

2025-08-02 Thread Bret Johnson via Freedos-devel
FWIW, one thing to keep in mind is that when Microsoft implemented LFN they didn't actually do it in DOS. LFN was not implemented until Windows was started and you were operating in a DOS box underneath Windows. As far as how MS "integrated" things like caching with LFN & SFN, and what happene

Re: [Freedos-devel] DOSLFN bugfix explanations and ideas - was: FreeDOS Interim Build T2508

2025-08-02 Thread tom ehlert via Freedos-devel
Hi Eric, > thank you for the analysis that int 25/26 disk access > (and int 21.73 access) bypass the kernel BUFFERS cache. > Note that int21_fat32 (int 21.7305) would even get > disk area type flags (dir, fat, data) from the caller, > which would make it easier to "buffer" those calls. > I agree

Re: [Freedos-devel] DOSLFN bugfix explanations and ideas - was: FreeDOS Interim Build T2508

2025-08-02 Thread Eric Auer via Freedos-devel
Hi Tom, thank you for the analysis that int 25/26 disk access (and int 21.73 access) bypass the kernel BUFFERS cache. Note that int21_fat32 (int 21.7305) would even get disk area type flags (dir, fat, data) from the caller, which would make it easier to "buffer" those calls. I agree that you