Re: 1.3.62 and fat/msdos/vfat observations

Eric Plante (planteer@jsp.umontreal.ca)
Fri, 16 Feb 1996 09:30:00 -0500 (EST)

On Thu, 15 Feb 1996, Albert Cahalan wrote:
> >> I've heard from someone (please correct me if I'm wrong!) that=3D=
20
> >> the POSIX specifications require both "makefile" and "Makefile"=3D=
20
> >> to be able to coexist in the same directory.
> >>=3D20
> >
> > POSIX.1 requires that all characters except '\0' and '/' are valid =
in
> > filenames and distinct.
>=20
> So then is is an almost-POSIX filesystem. Since the Win95 filname
> restrictions are reasonable, it is best to just use them as is.
> People who need a true POSIX filesystem can use ext2 instead.

Noone ever said that that was the _only_ POSIX requirement. I don't kno=
w=20
POSIX.1 myself (yet - os course in progress), but I assume it would nee=
d=20
ownership info and permission bits that it does not have at all, thus t=
he=20
need to run umsdos on top of vfat. Think of all the people who got thei=
r=20
computer (pc) with one big partition, and then installed dos stuff on i=
t,=20
and then installed linux with a umsdos root. I personnally also need=20
umsdos because I think it's a flexible and easy way to solve disk space=
=20
problems (my ext2 partition is full, so I've moved alot of stuff like=20
/usr/info or /usr/doc/... to a umsdos partition).

+--Eric Plante------------------------------------------------------+
| =ABDes femmes nues se jetaient dans ses bras avec une joie d=E9mente=BB=
|
| - Boris Vian |
+-http://www.jsp.umontreal.ca/~planteer/ ---------------------------+