From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu Oct 12 10:51:23 1995 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id KAA23387 for hackers-outgoing; Thu, 12 Oct 1995 10:51:23 -0700 Received: from phaeton.artisoft.com (phaeton.Artisoft.COM [198.17.250.211]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id KAA23375 ; Thu, 12 Oct 1995 10:51:20 -0700 Received: (from terry@localhost) by phaeton.artisoft.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id KAA15467; Thu, 12 Oct 1995 10:47:58 -0700 From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <199510121747.KAA15467@phaeton.artisoft.com> Subject: Re: MSDOSfs long filename support.... To: sos@FreeBSD.ORG Date: Thu, 12 Oct 1995 10:47:58 -0700 (MST) Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <199510121136.EAA01458@freefall.freebsd.org> from "sos@FreeBSD.ORG" at Oct 12, 95 04:36:41 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 1040 Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk > While fumbling along with WIN95 (yuck) here at work it hit me that > WIN95 is able to put long filenames onto a MSDOS FAT filesystem. > > They way they do it is easy, and I'm thinking of putting support > into our msdos filesystem driver. > > Would this bring us closer to running of a msdos filesystem ?? > (modulo unstabilities in the msdosfs support). > It should be possible to load the files under dos with a > special utility (or WIN95) and then run FreeBSD off of that > directory right?? I've thought about this too. The MSDOSFS is currently an unhappy camper; there are still the UFS superblock corruption issues and the move/rename crashes to fixup before it can be safely used. The umsdos FS (Linux) also supports device nodes. The remedy under BSD using the Win95 long name support should probably be devfs. This implies that the backing store requirement for devfs must go away. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.