Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Fri, 18 Oct 1996 12:09:50 -0700 | From | Gordon Chaffee <> | Subject | Re: 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
|  |