These are all legitimate concerns for a FAT driver, but keep in mind the WDK library also has things like large chunks of the storage stack, the input stack, the floppy stack, audio and network stuff, etc...
We could decide to keep our current FAT driver (or find a workaround), but still implement this idea for the other drivers. Best regards, Alex Ionescu On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 6:37 AM, Michael Fritscher <mich...@fritscher.net>wrote: > Hi, > > normally, I wouldn't have any problem with having drivers on a second disc > / image. But FAT (and in particular cdfs) are core-drivers in my opinion, > which are needed almost every time - also for booting from CD for > installation. FAT is widely used still today, e.g. on usb-sticks. > > What are currently the biggest problems in these drivers? If remember > correctly, our cache manager isn't compatible to the one in Windows, and > these drivers have workarounds, is it? > > Perhaps the drivers could be written by a GSoC project or something like > that? > > Additionally, what about NTFS? Is there a ntfs-driver in the MSDN-library > as is the FAT-driver? If not, almost nothing is won if we use the > fat-driver from MS: The OS- dependent part of the ntfs-driver need to be > written from scratch from us anyway, which could then be reused by our > FAT-driver. And hey, the filesystem part of the FAT-driver shouldn't be > too complicated if we managed to write a NTFS-driver^^ > > Best regards, > Michael Fritscher > > > _______________________________________________ > Ros-dev mailing list > Ros-dev@reactos.org > http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev >
_______________________________________________ Ros-dev mailing list Ros-dev@reactos.org http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
