Re: FAT/VFAT/FAT32 reimplimintation...

Teunis Peters (
Mon, 28 Jul 1997 12:54:49 -0600 (MDT)

On Sun, 20 Jul 1997, James Mastros wrote:

> I'm not going to support umsdos/uvfat (or it will be dead last on my
> priority list) because I don't use it. In my view, fatish filesystems
> should be used to access data that you need to get to from a non-ext2
> supporting OS, like DOS. I don't know what you meen about uncompressing
> arj/zip files (IE what this has to do with uvfat)... and I have never
> heard of xdenu (looking it up now...) ahh... "With Xdenu you can easily use
> your PC as Xterminal." -- What does this have to do with umsdos/uvfat?

UMSDOS is the _EASIEST_ way to go to Linux from DOeSn't work/WINdoze...
And the archives travel as '.zip' or '.arj'. Neither DOS app supports
long filenames so any storage method that uses long filenames will break.

It's an in-between filesystem. That's all.
[also useful on shared dos/linux volumes where you WANT permissions...]

> Remember that this is not designed to replace the existing
> msdos,vfat,umsdos,uvfat... filesystems. This is a learning tool for me,
> and it will likely be many months (years, even)... untill this is anything
> close to ready to use on a not-ready-to-have-daily-crashes system. I'm not
> even going to use it myself for mainstreem stuff, I'm going to register the
> "fatish" fs, to avoid any name-clashes...

That nicely solves the UMSDOS problem... <G>. What problem?

- Teunis