> >> nor removal of phrases like "All Rights Reserved." that are useless now
> > Pat sent an email to this list -- here's your chance if you really care
> > about this!
>
> The Buenos Aires Convention (1911) that required this was superseded by
> the Universal Copyright and Berne conventions. More on this at
> http://www.cni.org/Hforums/cni-copyright/1999-01/0196.html
Honestly I believe you're right here -- the issue is that changing
copyright messages without agreement of the original author is a bit shaky
IMHO. If you just get Pat's go ahead for the change then I'm all for it.
Note that the GPL doesn't use "all rights reserved", it gives an example
like
Gnomovision version 69, Copyright (C) year name of author
Gnomovision comes with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY; for details type `show w'.
This is free software, and you are welcome to redistribute it
under certain conditions; type `show c' for details.
FreeDOS could, say, show the full message if you press a certain F key(as
it waits for F5/F8 anyway), like this
FreeDOS kernel build 2035a-WHATEVER. Copyright...
This kernel comes with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY and you are welcome to
redistribute it under certain conditions; press F1 for details.
> > It's more difficult than a simple "removal". If you'd simply replace all
> > fnode references with SFT's you'll see a substantial increase in code
> > size (because SFT's are "FAR"). Also fnodes are used in situations where
> > SFTs can't do the job (dir operations).
>
> You're right - there are for example cluster fields that must be 32 bit
> and not 16 bit for FAT32.
Well those can be dealt with, a bit awkward though. IIRC Win98 stores
these clusters in the various "SHARE" related fields. Not sure how many
DOS programs (if any) depend on these on FAT32 though. Maybe
SMARTDRV and DOSLFN or LFNDOS?
> > However -- replacing the use of the persistent fnodes that are now in
> > the HMA by SFTs is a good idea IMHO. This is just a question of time, it
> > may never happen but it can happen if somebody does it and it works well.
>
> I see. What about including the SFT in the F-node structure and removing
> all duplicating fields? As all SFTs are pointed to by a linked list, I
> think that this is possible. What do you think?
IMHO easiest to copy those fields across that matter, and then then delete
them from the persistent fnodes. i.e. the far fnodes would be able to
become different from the near ones, and xlt_fd() and save_far_fnode()
would no longer use "fmemcpy" but copy individual fields.
Another difference is the way that directory entries are addressed: SFT's
use (sector number, entry in sector), where fnodes use (starting cluster
number of dir, entry in directory). And if you don't keep the whole
directory entry in memory then dir_write would have to become
read/modify/write instead of simply "write".
Takes a fair bit of time of course, it just depends how motivated one is.
Bart
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by OSTG. Have you noticed the changes on
Linux.com, ITManagersJournal and NewsForge in the past few weeks? Now,
one more big change to announce. We are now OSTG- Open Source Technology
Group. Come see the changes on the new OSTG site. www.ostg.com
_______________________________________________
Freedos-kernel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-kernel
