Re: [MiNT] 1.15.7 beta

[joska@nvg.org (Jo Even Skarstein)]

On Thu, 2 Mar 2000 01:51:48 +0000, kellis wrote:

> However, 1 thing I do not agree is the NEWTOSFS not being optional
> anymore. This breaks gfa compiler for example That means (I know you all

How does it break it? I really don't understand how NEWFATFS can break
anything at all, unless there's a bug somewhere.

> I say, until all major software which do NOT have replacement to work
> nicely with NEWFATFS, it should be optional. A list could be made.

I have never had any problems with older software and NEWFATFS, this
includes Imagecopy and Interface. Long filenames is a different matter
though, but you don't *need* to enable VFAT (or cache) even if you
*can* ;-)

> such? These DO run (fortunately) in MiNT quite well enough, just because
> of the TOSFS (rom). If you take TOSFS away, you are taking too many
> software away from MiNT.

If this really is the case then there must be something wrong with the
TOS-interface in NEWFATFS, I really can't see how it can cause any problems
otherwise. Fixing this (possible) problem is IMO a much better solution
than keeping TOSFS.

/*
** Jo Even Skarstein    http://www.stud.ntnu.no/~josk/
**
**    beer - maria mckee - atari falcon - babylon 5
*/