lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1996]   [Oct]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: msdos fs bug? (comma in filename)
In article <199610172047.QAA29458@nic.ott.hookup.net>,
Andrew E. Mileski <aem@nic.ott.hookup.net> wrote:
>I agree (for what it's worth). I get this all time with many
>bad characters in the name - seems the vfat system accepts
>almost anything, yet Win95 barfs (can list it, but can't otherwise
>open or rename it).

I can't agree with this at all. I just went over to a Windows 95
machine and created a file called "Something,Something" with the
Windows 95 Explorer. It handles commas in the filename just fine.
I can't say if this is true for command.com, but it is not a limitation
of vfat on Windows 95.

In article <Pine.LNX.3.95.961018002109.846A-100000@gytha.demon.co.uk>,
Bryn Paul Arnold Jones <bpaj@gytha.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>Don't you just love MS, vfat is a posix.1 complient fs (I think posix.1),
>but Win95 can't handle all the chars you can stuff in the file names. ie
>vfat is posix compliant, but Win95's filesystem code isn't.

Could you point me to a reference that claims vfat is supposed to
be posix compliant? I've never seen that claim in Microsoft documentation,
and I looked for it. On the contrary, I saw something that said the
lack of hard links makes it incompatible with posix.1. NTFS is posix
compliant, however.

Gordon Chaffee
chaffee@plateau.cs.berkeley.edu

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:37    [W:0.092 / U:1.296 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site