From owner-freebsd-questions Wed Jan 3 11:06:38 1996 Return-Path: owner-questions Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id LAA01018 for questions-outgoing; Wed, 3 Jan 1996 11:06:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from main.statsci.com (main.statsci.com [198.145.127.110]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id LAA01012 for ; Wed, 3 Jan 1996 11:06:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from block.statsci.com by main.statsci.com with smtp (Smail3.1.29.1 #3) id m0tXYVx-000r3sC; Wed, 3 Jan 96 11:06 PST Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by block.statsci.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id LAA02229; Wed, 3 Jan 1996 11:06:20 -0800 Message-Id: <199601031906.LAA02229@block.statsci.com> To: Chuck Robey Cc: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Can FreeBSD be visible from Win95? In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 03 Jan 1996 13:40:11 -0500." Reply-to: scott@statsci.com Date: Wed, 03 Jan 1996 11:06:19 -0800 From: Scott Blachowicz Sender: owner-questions@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk Chuck Robey wrote[in private email to me, reprinted here with permission :-)]:: > I'm not an authority on this by any means, but I'm pretty sure I'm right > on what I said. That doesn't mean you could be right _too_, but I have I believe we are both right. > heard lots of folks saying that the msdos filesystem code in FreeBSD is > not correct, and the reason I heard was because it tried to do buffering > of the msdos stuff, but the locking mechanism was incorrect, causing > errors to propagate. This is supposed to be most obvious when doing mv > commands. I think you could get either Justin Gibbs or Terry (I forget > his lastname, but you know who I mean) to explain it more authoritatively. I've brought this up a couple times before and the result of the discussions was that there seemed to be a connection between using FIPS to shrink the DOS slice and the BSD corruptions I was seeing. I believe the FIPS author was involved in some of the discussion (though possibly not on the FreeBSD lists??). I think it had something to do with changing the size of the used portion of the FAT without changing the size of the table itself (there's a check for this sort of condition in the mtools package that the FIPS author said shouldn't be made because the condition is legitimate). That's something that appears to be "legal" but confuses the FreeBSD code (and, as I noted, MS-stuff and Linux have no problems with it). I'm no expert in any of this (DOS, file systems, ...). And, I think it was Terry Lambert who was suggesting a possible connection between having the FIPS-shrunk DOS slice before my BSD slice. Scott Blachowicz Ph: 206/283-8802x240 StatSci, a div of MathSoft, Inc. 1700 Westlake Ave N #500 scott@statsci.com Seattle, WA USA 98109 Scott.Blachowicz@seaslug.org