Re: [Freedos-user] Feelings on lfn
On Nov 8 2022, 17:40, Ralf Quint wrote: On 11/8/2022 2:55 AM, userbeit...@abwesend.de wrote: On Nov 8, 2022, 01:58, Ralf Quint wrote: But I only use this feature sparingly, as there are a lot of older software that can't handle them. And the mapping to some xyz~1.abc is actually losing two significant characters of those 8 available for generally usable filenames. On Linux, you can mount a FAT filesystem with the mount option "nonumtail", where you don't get the trailing "~1" at the end when it is still possible, e.g. when there are no other files with the same name. How is any Linux feature possibly helping me with running an older, non-LFN aware program on (Free)DOS? It won't. If FreeDOS were to learn the same alternative way of not using the "tail" (~1, ~2 and so on) on short file names, at least were possible, that *could* help a little... A. ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Feelings on lfn
Hi Ralf, >> On Linux, you can mount a FAT filesystem with the mount option >> "nonumtail", where you don't get the trailing "~1" at the end when it is >> still possible, e.g. when there are no other files with the same name. > > How is any Linux feature possibly helping me with running an older, > non-LFN aware program on (Free)DOS? You could talk to that old DOS program and say: "Hey, look and learn, how it is done!" SCNR Cheers, Robert -- BTTR Software https://www.bttr-software.de/ DOS ain't dead https://www.bttr-software.de/forum/ ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] DOS was dead...
Hi, Ok sorry, got the reply later, and also the opinion I would vote for. Aitor On Thu, 15 Apr 2021 at 05:13, Jon Brase wrote: > >Apr 14, 2021 2:00:05 PM Ralf Quint : > > >And I stand by my comments that none of Windows 9x/ME is "running on > DOS". I don't have the time right now to provide the detailed proof for > that, but just look at the addresses of some of the DOS services before the > booting of the Windows 9x GUI and afterwards (in a DOS prompt). They will > be decisively different. You can install a TSR before the booting of > Windows 9x GUI that redirects some of the DOS vectors to produce some debug > output and you will not see that debug output when calling the same DOS > vector while running under Windows 9x. That was also the problem with some > DOS drivers for some SCSI adapters for example, which would not work under > Windows 95, until the manufacturer provided a proper Windows driver for it. > > I will note that Windows 95 *could* use DOS drivers. I/O performance > suffered horribly since DOS drivers weren't thread safe, but there was a > copy of DOS in the system VM for this purpose, even if it had nothing to do > under normal circumstances. +1 For performance reasons, rewritten into VDOS, VREDIR, ... But DOS lies still in every VM and its heart beats there. Aitor ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] DOS was dead...
Hi Ralf, On Wed, 14 Apr 2021 at 19:11, Ralf Quint wrote: > On 4/14/2021 8:54 AM, Liam Proven wrote: > > > >> Reality is, Windows 95 dos and Windows 98SE DOS is not really dos per > se > > Wrong. > Actually, in that part, Michael was correct. And as people like you seem > to pushing that old myth of "Windows 9x runs on top of DOS", one of my > next projects when I find time will be to come up with the definitive > proof for that... > I am curious about this. What do you mean here? :) In "Uncovered Windows95" precisely the opposite (WIndows 9X runs over DOS) was proven by renaming COMMAND.COM to KRNL386.EXE... And apparently Win32 applications run in VM0 with the "iddle call" beating there. Aitor ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Feelings on lfn
On 11/8/2022 2:55 AM, userbeit...@abwesend.de wrote: On Nov 8, 2022, 01:58, Ralf Quint wrote: But I only use this feature sparingly, as there are a lot of older software that can't handle them. And the mapping to some xyz~1.abc is actually losing two significant characters of those 8 available for generally usable filenames. On Linux, you can mount a FAT filesystem with the mount option "nonumtail", where you don't get the trailing "~1" at the end when it is still possible, e.g. when there are no other files with the same name. How is any Linux feature possibly helping me with running an older, non-LFN aware program on (Free)DOS? Ralf ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Feelings on lfn
On Nov 8, 2022, 01:58, Ralf Quint wrote: But I only use this feature sparingly, as there are a lot of older software that can't handle them. And the mapping to some xyz~1.abc is actually losing two significant characters of those 8 available for generally usable filenames. On Linux, you can mount a FAT filesystem with the mount option "nonumtail", where you don't get the trailing "~1" at the end when it is still possible, e.g. when there are no other files with the same name. Example: "longfilename.txt" would become "LONGFILE.TXT" in 8.3, but if you then create a second file of the name "longfile.txt", you'd have a problem. (It would probably become "LONGFI~1.TXT", because "LONGFILE.TXT" already existed.) Also, yet another file "longfilenamelist.txt" would then have to become something else, e.g. "LONGFI~2.TXT". Anyhow, the point is, there would be other ways... Cheers, A. ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
