Re: Windows 95 (VFAT) file systems?

Marty Leisner (
Thu, 19 Oct 1995 09:16:06 PDT

> _VERY_ useful when the disk you were backing up gets trashed.
> How about restoring it then?
> Anyway, why do the drivers like ntfs/hpfs etc allways go readonly?
> If they have the structures etc. done enough to read the dir entrys
> and the files, shouldn't they be able to update them?
> Oh well. Just a personal pet peeve.

I was talking about backing "files" as opposed to low-level filesystems...

To some degree, its much safer to make readonly file systems, since any
bugs in filesystem code won't munge the filesystem.

If a filesystem is totally lost, I suppose you could restore a lowest
common denominator (i.e. dos) and not lose any data (but maybe
lose attributes/names).

Also, it is probably easier to shove data into a new file system
than to restore files onto an arbitrary working filesystem...

Maybe something at user level (createfs?) to operate with data on a
raw paritition?

Member of the League for Programming Freedom