On Tue, 9 Mar 1999, Bernie wrote:
> There shouldn't be any problems adding LFN in a DOS program, I don't know
> how to do it, but I can't understand why we are restricted to just see the
> LFN.
> However, the program will be bigger (and thereby slower) and the file names
> aren't that nice for other DOS users (that don't have LFNDIR or something
> simular).
The program that handles lfns isn't any larger than those that don't
support them. The reason being that the program doesn't have the code
internal to the program itself. This is handled by the os. All the
program does is to make a call to a particular interrupt and service. The
difference being that with lfn names the service is different than that of
normal 8.3 names. If the program makes the extra call, then long
filenames will be accessable, otherwise it'll behave just like a normal
8.3 name. Caldera's lfn support works this way at least. I'm not
positive about microsofts, but I'd wager it works pretty much the same
way.
To unsubscribe from SURVPC send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
unsubscribe SURVPC in the body of the message.
Also, trim this footer from any quoted replies.
