The main bug/feature that I plan to work on is FAT+ support,
the working with 4GB files goes along with this since it adds
support for 4+GB files.
Please keep this out of production kernels.
I agree - modifying FAT to support files 4 GB is asking
for trouble. Of course you can add it to
OK, let me chime in on this. Jim and I had several conversations on
topics like this before I took over. I want to share the current
thinking.
We, as a group, have made a significant impact on the open source
community and computing in general. This is something we need to keep
in mind as we
Hi Christian,
The main bug/feature that I plan to work on is FAT+ support,
the working with 4GB files goes along with this since it adds
support for 4+GB files.
Please keep this out of production kernels.
I agree - modifying FAT to support files 4 GB is asking
for trouble. Of course you
Hi Jeremy,
You misunderstand me :-) Of course we should support files of 2-4 GB
size in the STABLE kernel very soon! Just do not support ABOVE 4 GB
There are no longer multiple active branches, there is only trunk.
Trunk is stable, but there also is devel / unstable:
Nope, I'm not doing anything other than trying to gather enough
information with respect to project status to try to come up with a
road map and possibly plan release 1.1.
I have made *NO* decisions.
Pat
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 4:26 PM, Eric Auer e.a...@jpberlin.de wrote:
Hi Jeremy,
***
Ex-FAT support instead of FAT+ or FAT32+??
This idea seems more good like FAT+ instead :-)
And how is the support for Windows 3.1 / 3.11?
- Original Message -
From: freedos-kernel-requ...@lists.sourceforge.net
To: freedos-kernel@lists.sourceforge.net
Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2009 10:26
Hi Abrahan,
Ex-FAT support instead of FAT+ or FAT32+??
This idea seems more good like FAT+ instead :-)
And how is the support for Windows 3.1 / 3.11?
While it is called FAT, exFAT seems to differ a lot
from FAT. Also, exFAT is heavily patented... Talking
about FAT+... I really wonder
