From owner-freebsd-hackers  Sat Apr 26 03:47:41 1997
Return-Path: <owner-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id DAA18053
          for hackers-outgoing; Sat, 26 Apr 1997 03:47:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from parkplace.cet.co.jp (parkplace.cet.co.jp [202.32.64.1])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id DAA18048
          for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Sat, 26 Apr 1997 03:47:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (michaelh@localhost) by parkplace.cet.co.jp (8.8.5/CET-v2.1) with SMTP id KAA23397; Sat, 26 Apr 1997 10:46:08 GMT
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 1997 19:46:08 +0900 (JST)
From: Michael Hancock <michaelh@cet.co.jp>
To: Joachim Kuebart <joa@kuebart.stuttgart.netsurf.de>
cc: "Jeffrey J. Mountin" <sysop@mixcom.com>, hackers@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: VFAT 32 support in msdosfs
In-Reply-To: <XFMail.970426112148.joa@delos.lf.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.95.970426194404.23390A-100000@parkplace.cet.co.jp>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

On Sat, 26 Apr 1997, Joachim Kuebart wrote:

> >Much rather have NTFS in 95 with all the little BS files less then 1K.
> 
> Does NTFS have owners and permissions like any file system should? Besides, I
> don't understand why they didn't just use NTFS... Only so now there's 2
> _incompatible_ bad file systems ?

By the time you add Unicode and security to Win95 you would have WinNT. 

Mike Hancock