Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!ames!oliveb!apple!mattd
From: mattd@Apple.COM (Matt Deatherage)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple
Subject: Re: Greetings
Keywords: Finder,Desktop,Small C
Message-ID: <27489@apple.Apple.COM>
Date: 17 Mar 89 20:34:10 GMT
References: <27447@apple.Apple.COM> <1841@mentor.cc.purdue.edu>
Organization: Apple Computer Inc, Cupertino, CA
Lines: 43

In article <1841@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> asd@mace.cc.purdue.edu (Kareth) writes:
>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.
>
GS/OS's abstract file system is built to encompass virtually everything it
will find in any file system.  Most file systems will not handle all of the
capabilities of GS/OS, and so most FSTs will be incomplete implementations
of the abstract GS/OS file system.

>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.
>
I personally would rather see Apple create an FST for an already-existing
file system that handles *most* of the considerations, such as HFS.  That
not only opens up wider disk spaces to GS/OS users, it gives them the extra
capability of reading a whole lot of already-existing disks.  A completely
new file system might be closer to "perfect", but nothing already existing
would be compatible with it.  I would prefer something like an HFS FST which
tackles 90% of both problems, rather than 100% of one and 0% of the other.
Remember, the FST concept is *designed* to let people read disks of various
file systems.  I want to do that; I don't want to invent a new file system
and leave the others behind as "inferior".

>kareth.

==============================================================================
Matt Deatherage, Apple Computer, Inc. | "The opinions expressed in this tome
Send PERSONAL mail ONLY (please) to:  | should not be construed to imply that
AppleLink PE: Matt DTS  GEnie: AIIDTS | Apple Computer, Inc., or any of its
CompuServe: 76703,3030                | subsidiaries, in whole or in part,
Usenet:  mattd@apple.com              | have any opinion on any subject."
UUCP:  (other stuff)!ames!apple!mattd | "So there."
=============================================================================