Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!bu-cs!purdue!mentor.cc.purdue.edu!asd
From: asd@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Kareth)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple
Subject: Re: Greetings
Keywords: Finder,Desktop,Small C
Message-ID: <1841@mentor.cc.purdue.edu>
Date: 17 Mar 89 17:29:39 GMT
References: <27447@apple.Apple.COM>
Reply-To: asd@mace.cc.purdue.edu (Kareth)
Organization: Purdue University
Lines: 36

In article <27447@apple.Apple.COM> mattd@Apple.COM (Matt Deatherage) writes:
>Hello.  I am Matt Deatherage, and I work for Apple in the Apple II Developer
>Technical Support group.  After reading over people's shoulders for many
Hello Matt.  Glad to have some more Apple folk posting.

>GS/OS:  A while back, Kareth wrote that he was waiting for the native, true,
>GSOS.FST or something like that.  I hope he's not holding his breath.  GS/OS
Certainly not.  If I held my breath waiting for anything from Apple, I'd
died of suffocation of waiting for a GS+ a long long time ago.

>is an *abstract* file system, not a real one.  I can't imagine an FST being
>written to actually create this abstract file system on media, especially
>since the details of how files are stored on the media are deliberately
>left *out* of GS/OS.  Rather, the FSTs are pieces of code that implement the
>abstract file system as fully as possible within *existing* file systems
>(such as ProDOS, High Sierra or ISO 9660).
Absolutely correct.  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.  It's crowded
enough as it is with Ram, Rom, 2 5.25's and whatever 3.5's are opened, and
the trash.  Can only put 53? files in root directory.  I know, why would ya
want more?, well, how bout disks that just have icon, fonts, pics, stuff on em?
Don't need no subdirectories for them.  Ok, maybe partitions and the alike
aren't too bad to work with, but I'd still prefer to have everything under
one / like on UNIX.

>This shouldn't imply that an FST couldn't or wouldn't be created for an
>entirely new file system, but there isn't a "GS/OS File System" for a
>GSOS.FST file to interpret.

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.

kareth.