bryan@geo-works.UUCP (Bryan Ford) (07/30/89)
In article <7416@cbmvax.UUCP>, kevin@cbmvax.UUCP (Kevin Klop) writes: >In article <3855@cps3xx.UUCP> porkka@frith.UUCP (Joe Porkka) writes: >>Real question: Will there be an actuall ENV: handler as the >>1.3 update manual says? If so, is it OK to make subdirectories? Is >>it ok to make arbitrary files, possibly somewhat large files? >>I guess the real question is: Will ENV: handler have a filesystem, or >>will it be like PIPE:? > >ENV: will remain as an assign for the moment. One thing to consider is to create a special sub-filesystem handler which would take (as specified in the MountList) a filename somewhere, and it would use the specified file to create a complete filesystem in that one file, which would be much more adapted to small files. It would be sort of like an 'ARC' or 'ZOO' in a DOS handler, except with no compression. What use would it be? This would be great for things that require many small variable-length files and even subdirectories. BBSes come to mind immediately. Each user could have a subdirectory, and various files could be stored in each subdirectory (stats, configuration, even received mail). It could also be used for message directories. Messages could be as long as necessary, but short messages wouldn't use an entire 1K of disk space (as it does on the AmigaDOS filesystems). So, is anybody up for writing something like this? I've been wanting to for a while, but never found the time. Bryan -- _______________________________________ _/ Bryan Ford - bryan@geo-works.uucp \_ _/ ..!utah-cs!caeco!i-core!geo-works!bryan \_ / ..!uunet!iconsys!caeco!i-core!geo-works!bryan \ \_____________Author: Chroma Paint______________/
doug@xdos.UUCP (Doug Merritt) (08/06/89)
In article <2025.AA2025@geo-works> bryan@geo-works.UUCP (Bryan Ford) writes: >So, is anybody up for writing something like this? I've been wanting to >for a while, but never found the time. Welcome to the club. In all seriousness, this is (IMHO) the major reason why things don't get done. Even all those obvious things that should have been done long ago. And also why people keep suggesting the same good ideas, over and over again, until they start to sound stale. They're not actually stale, everybody's just disappointed that no one found the time for them yet. This is probably a bigger impediment to progress in the world than ignorance, NIH, and narrow mindedness. And that's saying a lot. I'm as guilty of this as anyone else, of course. And I intend to change that, as soon as I find the time. :-) Doug -- Doug Merritt {pyramid,apple}!xdos!doug Member, Crusaders for a Better Tomorrow Professional Wildeyed Visionary
peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (08/07/89)
In article <438@xdos.UUCP>, doug@xdos.UUCP (Doug Merritt) writes: > In article <2025.AA2025@geo-works> bryan@geo-works.UUCP (Bryan Ford) writes: > >So, is anybody up for writing something like this? I've been wanting to > >for a while, but never found the time. > Welcome to the club. In all seriousness, this is (IMHO) the major reason > why things don't get done. Some of us do stuff, but derivers and handlers and stuff are pretty hairy. I want to do some really cool things to a console device, but the prospect of starting from scratch on something like that is daunting. Anyone have a sample console handler, in 'C'? There are 42,000 sample RAM disk handlers, but no console handlers? -- Peter "Have you hugged your wolf today" da Silva `-_-' ...texbell!sugar!peter, or peter@sugar.hackercorp.com 'U`