Messages in this thread |  | | | From | (H. Peter Anvin) | | Subject | Re: umsdos/uvfat | | Date | 6 Feb 1998 08:54:57 GMT |
| |
Followup to: <Pine.LNX.3.96.980205191829.1205Q-100000@jennifer-unix.dyn.ml.org> By author: James Mastros <root@jennifer-unix.dyn.ml.org> In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel > From the POV of DOS, vfat and fat are the same thing. DOS sees some > illegal directory entries, and it ignores them. Most programs should do the > same. The exceptions are programs that are designed to re-write entries > (sorters and defragmenters, primarly), and those that are designed to test > for bad entries. Anything else that dosn't ignore them is buggy. >
Delete a file. Create a new file. Voila, the new file got the old file's long filename...
vfat is a *much* worse hack than umsdos. Personally, I would suggest ignoring this Micro$oft monstrosity as much as possible.
-hpa -- PGP: 2047/2A960705 BA 03 D3 2C 14 A8 A8 BD 1E DF FE 69 EE 35 BD 74 See http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/ for web page and full PGP public key I am Bahá'í -- ask me about it or see http://www.bahai.org/ "To love another person is to see the face of God." -- Les Misérables - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
|  |