From: "dan" Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp Subject: Re: need help with LFN please... Date: Sun, 5 Apr 1998 20:48:07 +0200 Organization: Academic Computer Centre Utrecht, (ACCU) Lines: 54 Message-ID: <6g8jkk$cvm$1@news.cc.ruu.nl> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: warande3142.warande.ruu.nl To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp Precedence: bulk Eli Zaretskii wrote in message ... > >On Fri, 3 Apr 1998, dan wrote: > >It's not DJGPP, it's DOS itself. When you set LFN=n, DJGPP uses old >DOS file-related calls which truncate long names automatically. OK. Got that. Thanx. >For this to work, you need to unzip the archives with a program which >does NOT support LFN. I'll use good old pkunzip 2.04 then... > >> Can I then recompile the whole bunch for SFN (Short File Names). > >You don't need to recompile. Set LFN=n in the environment, and the >long names are disabled. Well, by now I understand that I don't need to, but I guess I asked the wrong question. I'd like to compile all the source code, since it's a nice test for the source code as well as the compiler+linker. Since the last couple of months I like to compile stuff... (Got Linux, started with GCC, then saw DJGPP, which got me here). So, the right question would have been: If I compile all the stuff, can I expect problems because of LFN's, and, if it compiles, can I expect the various binaries find all the stuff they need? But I guess it will probably work if it uses old dos calls. > >Not that I understand why would anybody want to disable this >feature... Well... If one uses it on plain DOS... easy defrag would be one thing! >> I wonder how you DJGPP programmers have solved this irritating matter. > >Those who use LFN work on Windows 9X. That's how it is usually >solved. OK. I'll stick with 8+3 filenames for now. If DR-DOS delivers an update of their LFN support, I'll be sure to try that!. Thanx again. Dan.