From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Jan 15 16:35:22 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) id QAA09994 for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 15 Jan 1997 16:35:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from awfulhak.demon.co.uk (awfulhak.demon.co.uk [158.152.17.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) with ESMTP id QAA09934 for ; Wed, 15 Jan 1997 16:35:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from awfulhak.demon.co.uk (localhost.coverform.lan [127.0.0.1]) by awfulhak.demon.co.uk (8.8.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id XAA15009; Wed, 15 Jan 1997 23:24:10 GMT Message-Id: <199701152324.XAA15009@awfulhak.demon.co.uk> X-Mailer: exmh version 1.6.9 8/22/96 To: Michael Smith cc: wilko@yedi.iaf.nl (Wilko Bulte), FreeBSD-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: msdosfs creates illegal dir names? In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 15 Jan 1997 14:10:37 +1030." <199701150340.OAA04206@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 23:24:10 +0000 From: Brian Somers Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > You can't say "mkdir .foo", no, but the standards for what is and > isn't a "valid" filename are pretty grey, and " .foo" is well > within them. Ah, but if DOS doesn't let you "mkdir" or "open()" .foo, that implies its invalidity. Other routines may support ' .foo', but correctly so, as they should "assume" that the filesystem is intact. If DOS was a bit more solid, I would say that running "scandisk" should be the decider. It it allows it, it's valid and anything that doesn't is wrong. -- Brian , Don't _EVER_ lose your sense of humour....