| 1 | | Is it not better to not include fat32.ifs in ArcaOS at all then? I doubt that users need "castrated" version. Castrated QSINIT, fat32, XWP, ... Is this not too much? Why do we need to include it to the distribution if user will need to install a full version anyway? Samsung code is Linux, not OS/2, so it does nothing to do with fat32.ifs. exFAT support in fat32.ifs is written from scratch. exFAT is not a separate IFS, because it is FAT too. Why create yet another FAT driver from scratch if I could enhance an existing one? It will require significantly less efforts because it uses much of existing routines. Ok, I'll think about adding #ifdef's to switch the exFAT support off (Not sure if it is really needed, though, because exFAT support is switched off by default, if /exfat is not specified on the command line). |
| | 1 | Is it not better to not include fat32.ifs in ArcaOS at all then? I doubt that users need "castrated" version. Castrated QSINIT, fat32, XWP, ... Is this not too much? Why do we need to include it to the distribution if user will need to install a full version anyway? Samsung code is Linux, not OS/2, so it has nothing to do with fat32.ifs. exFAT support in fat32.ifs is written from scratch. exFAT is not a separate IFS, because it is FAT too. Why create yet another FAT driver from scratch if I could enhance an existing one? It will require significantly less efforts because it uses much of existing routines. Ok, I'll think about adding #ifdef's to switch the exFAT support off (Not sure if it is really needed, though, because exFAT support is switched off by default, if /exfat is not specified on the command line). |
