Text 723, 50 rader
Skriven 2007-06-11 22:43:28 av Mike Luther (1:117/3001.0)
    Kommentar till text 722 av Marc Lewis (1:396/45.0)
Ärende: re: Long filename support
=================================
Hi Marc.

 ML> What I'm really after is some sort of device driver for either 4DOS or 
 ML> OS/2 DOS that will let it see filenames that exceed 
 ML> the 8.3 length.  I've looked at LFNDOS, but that 
 ML> doesn't work.  And the driver to let OS/2 see and work 
 ML> with a locally mounted FAT32 partition isn't what I 
 ML> want either.  I don't have _any_ FATxx partitions on 
 ML> any of my machines; it's either HPFS or NTFS or CIFS 
 ML> (sp?) (and of course CDFS.)  OS/2's DOS simply cannot 
 ML> deal with anything past 8.3, which I find very odd.  
 ML> Even Win95 OSR2 could deal with >8.3 in a DOS window 
 ML> or present 8.3 equivalents in a DOS7 "boot to command 
 ML> prompt" scenario.

 ML> Interesting that there were many brilliant programming minds behind OS/2 
 ML> and the vast collection of excellent programmers not 
 ML> directly affiliated with IBM (like Daniela)...  
 ML> Interesting that someone hasn't come up with a work-
 ML> around. 

I think you will find that the core issue surrounding this may likely be the
whole mess between Microsoft and IBM over OS/2 in a convoluted way. Recall that
the whole DOS operation issue for use with OS/2 was still,for better or worse,
part of the Microsoft MSDOS mess as well.  And the whole idea of truncating the
olng file names to present some sort of a workable operation within the
Microsoft world, would have to have been cast down into the OS/2 child process
of DOS as an object.  As far as I know, one of the things that IBM still wound
up having to do is pay Microsoft for certain 'things' that were(are) a part of
OS/2, for each instance of a license for a 'seat' in the OS/2 world.  If you
look at the LAN opening statements and readme this and that, you'll see where
this 'ownership' of various rights to things is still in there and in the
executable if you look at the actual code and copyrights in the code itself as
well.

I don't know this, but suspect strongly that the cast down of a 'short' name
into the 8X3 world which wound up in Microsoft's aresenal, wasn't something
that was licensed to IBM in the later fisticuffs.  Thus, if so, sure would have
been one of the reasons the official programming minds at IBM didn't provide
for anything like that in DOS for OS/2 ..

Just speculation on my part, however.


--> Sleep well; OS/2's still awake! ;)

Mike @ 1:117/3001

--- Maximus/2 3.01
 * Origin: Ziplog Public Port (1:117/3001)