Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!iuvax!purdue!sage.cc.purdue.edu!aj0
From: aj0@sage.cc.purdue.edu (Eric Mulholland)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple
Subject: Re: Prodos symbolic Linkes (was Re: Matt D. / MAC FST)
Message-ID: <3600@sage.cc.purdue.edu>
Date: 11 Feb 90 01:09:02 GMT
References: <2463@ttardis.UUCP> <38482@apple.Apple.COM> <13033@fs2.NISC.SRI.COM> <38520@apple.Apple.COM>
Reply-To: aj0@sage.cc.purdue.edu (Eric Mulholland)
Organization: Purdue University
Lines: 26

In article <38520@apple.Apple.COM> farrier@Apple.COM (Cary Farrier) writes:
>	Alot of P8 applications rely on things being at a fixed address
>	in ProDOS 8 (they muck with it and patch things out, etc.).  There
>	also is not very much free room in P8 to do anything, so the
>	task wouldn't be very easy or clean.

    If programs are playing around in Prodos 8 like that, it's the
author's problem and not Apple's.  I remember when Prodos first came,
Apple said it would not hesitate to move code around when Prodos is
recompiled.  They learnned (hopefully) from the dos 3.3 days.  I can
buy the reasons of not enough space in Prodos to added the code.  But
the problems with P8 utilities being allowed to read forked (data fork)
files, I believe gives more problems than solving them, because the
user is not always aware that he is maliplating an extended file.
    While I'm speaking of Prodos 8, why is it when Prodos first came
out, that file names did not support true lower case letters then?
I know with dos 3.3, you could name files using lower case, but prodos
didn't allow that.  Does it have to deal with SOS somehow?  If so,
why didn't SOS support lower case?  The excuse that the standard //+ does
not display lower case is not good enough, since dos 3.3 allowed it.

-- 
     ____
 Y_,_|[]|   Eric Mulholland
{|_|_|__|   aj0@sage.cc.purdue.edu
//oo--OO    ...!pur-ee!sage.cc!aj0