AWCTTYPA@UIAMVS.BITNET ("David A. Lyons") (03/19/89)
>Date: Fri, 17 Mar 89 17:29:39 GMT >From: Kareth <mentor.cc.purdue.edu!asd@PURDUE.EDU> >Subject: Re: Greetings > >[...] But the ProDOS fst is hardly taking care of implementing that >file system to the full capability of GS/OS. I don't want to have 7 >or so partitions on the Finder desktop for a 200 meg drive. [...] Can >only put 53? files in root directory. [...] Isn't GS/OS capable of >handling something in the Gigabyte range, with long file names (more >than 64 char), etc, w/o having to resort to partitions and stuff? >That's why there should be a GSOS.FST. Or maybe a PRO2.FST that will >take care of handling the full power of GS/OS. Okay, let's get this straighter. The ProDOS file system is inherently and permanently limited to 32M volumes, 16M files, 15-character filenames. The ProDOS FST correctly and fully implements the ProDOS file system. It even goes beyond that and lets you create "extended" files that have two forks; these files can't be read through ProDOS 8. But extending the ProDOS format to more than 32M volumes, 16M files, and 15-character filenames won't work. You can't do it and still end up with something readable by ProDOS 8. GS/OS can indeed deal with volumes and files up to 2^32 bytes = 4096 megabytes (4 gigabytes). It can also handle extremely long pathnames and filenames (8000 characters at present, 65535 without changing the call parameter lists), and any characters except ":" (and NUL?) can appear in filenames. This does _not_ mean you should expect that any FST will support all this; most file systems (and therefore their FSTs) will be more limiting than GS/OS itself. --David A. Lyons bitnet: awcttypa@uiamvs DAL Systems CompuServe: 72177,3233 P.O. Box 287 GEnie mail: D.LYONS2 North Liberty, IA 52317 AppleLinkPE: Dave Lyons
asd@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Kareth) (03/19/89)
In article <8903181745.aa00298@SMOKE.BRL.MIL> AWCTTYPA@UIAMVS.BITNET ("David A. Lyons") writes: >[..Facts about ProDOS limits..] Fine. ProDOS is stuck the way it is. >[....] >This does _not_ mean you should expect that any FST will support all >this; most file systems (and therefore their FSTs) will be more >limiting than GS/OS itself. How about just something that comes close? Like HFS? That's all I'm asking, something to come a lot closer to fully being able to use all or most of the features of GS/OS. If you have a computer that can run at 16Mhz ya don't wanna be having to do all your work at 1Mhz do ya? Kareth -- Be excellent to one another!