Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!spool.mu.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!bloom-beacon!eru!hagbard!sunic!chalmers.se!afs-news!trout!dahlstr From: dahlstr@hus.chalmers.se (Gunnar Dahlstrom) Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc Subject: Re: Why is erase *.* slower with 4dos.com than with command.com? Message-ID: <1991May20.220341.28671@afs-news.utc.chalmers.se> Date: 20 May 91 22:03:41 GMT Article-I.D.: afs-news.1991May20.220341.28671 References: <1991May20.064529.1764@nic.funet.fi> Sender: news@afs-news.utc.chalmers.se (News System) Reply-To: dahlstr@hus.chalmers.se () Organization: Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden. Lines: 24 In article <1991May20.064529.1764@nic.funet.fi> akoivuma@finsun.csc.fi (Antti Koivumaki) writes: >I have noticed that when I use 4dos.com, erase *.* works much slower than >when command.com is used. I tested this by erasing 100 files using each. >I did this on an otherwise empty hard disk partition. The result: >- using 4dos.com (v. 4.02), erase/q *.* takes about 5 seconds >- using command.com (of DOS 3.3), erase *.* takes less than 0.5 seconds. With filehandels you can only delete 1 file. So if you write del *.* 4dos make a list of all files and execute delete for every fil there is. But if you use FCB (wich Microsoft official not support (its a old way to handle files) but they use it in command.com) you can execute a del *.* if you use FCB to handels wit your files! // Gunnar =============================================================================== Gunnar Dahlstrom Chalmers University of Technology Div. Building Technology 412 96 Gothenburg, Sweden E-Mail: dahlstr@hus.chalmers.se or dahlstr@htpc2.hus.chalmers.se ===============================================================================