| Poster | Thread |
pavlor
|  |
Re: This is not right Posted on 11-Aug-2012 13:15:00
| | [ #21 ] |
|
|
 |
Elite Member  |
Joined: 10-Jul-2005 Posts: 3811
From: Unknown | | |
|
| @Franko
Quote:
| OS 4.0 came with SFS as standard |
And also FFS2 with support for long filenames. I think there is 68k version (at least with 4.0 Classic). |
|
| Status: Offline |
|
|
NutsAboutAmiga
|  |
Re: This is not right Posted on 11-Aug-2012 13:17:54
| | [ #22 ] |
|
|
 |
Elite Member  |
Joined: 9-Jun-2004 Posts: 8684
From: Norway | | |
|
| @number6
Well you need 5 chars for “.info” any file longer than 25 chars can’t have a icon, on OFS/FFS. _________________ Software developer and forum troll. Please check out my software: Excalibur, Basilisk 2, AmigaInputAnywhere. |
|
| Status: Offline |
|
|
ChaosLord
|  |
Re: This is not right Posted on 11-Aug-2012 13:37:28
| | [ #23 ] |
|
|
 |
Cult Member  |
Joined: 4-Apr-2005 Posts: 674
From: Houston, Texas USA | | |
|
| |
| Status: Offline |
|
|
number6
|  |
Re: This is not right Posted on 11-Aug-2012 13:44:21
| | [ #24 ] |
|
|
 |
Elite Member  |
Joined: 25-Mar-2005 Posts: 7999
From: In the village | | |
|
| @ChaosLord
Quote:
| u forgot that your wee Amiga can store long filename files into RAM: even if you do not have SFS or PFS installed. |
Indeed. That used to be a workaround. Rename the longfilename while in RAM: and then copy to H/D.
#6
_________________ This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author. *Secrecy has served us so well* |
|
| Status: Offline |
|
|
QuikSanz
|  |
Re: This is not right Posted on 11-Aug-2012 18:54:51
| | [ #25 ] |
|
|
 |
Cult Member  |
Joined: 28-Mar-2003 Posts: 550
From: Surf City - Huntington Beach, Ca. | | |
|
| @TheKorn,
The point being is you don't see it till the bottom of the page. At the top of page there should be a brief timeline of all till now, then delve deeper into each progressive incarnation.
Chris
PS, my 2 cents
|
|
| Status: Offline |
|
|
itix
|  |
Re: This is not right Posted on 11-Aug-2012 18:56:00
| | [ #26 ] |
|
|
 |
Elite Member  |
Joined: 22-Dec-2004 Posts: 2596
From: Freedom world | | |
|
| @ChaosLord
Franko is right. Insert any Workbench disk to a disk drive and boot to full Workbench -- you are stuck with 30 character filenames.
I didnt know ram disk supported long filenames but certainly it was not documented feature. All documentation refer to 30 character limit. _________________ Free IRC client for Amiga: www.amirc.org |
|
| Status: Offline |
|
|
vox
|  |
Re: This is not right Posted on 11-Aug-2012 21:05:19
| | [ #27 ] |
|
|
 |
Elite Member  |
Joined: 12-Jun-2005 Posts: 3188
From: Belgrade, Serbia | | |
|
| @itix
Quote:
| Franko is right. Insert any Workbench disk to a disk drive and boot to full Workbench -- you are stuck with 30 character filenames. I didnt know ram disk supported long filenames but certainly it was not documented feature. All documentation refer to 30 character limit. |
So the real limit was 30 chars. Was this limit ever overcomed by some patch? Did it took OS 4.0 to formally remove it?_________________ AF 2012, Hollywood Designer 5, AmigaOS 3.5,4.0 and 4.1 registered user, user of Linux Mint 13 Roots Taking Over The World |
|
| Status: Offline |
|
|
NutsAboutAmiga
|  |
Re: This is not right Posted on 11-Aug-2012 21:06:58
| | [ #28 ] |
|
|
 |
Elite Member  |
Joined: 9-Jun-2004 Posts: 8684
From: Norway | | |
|
| @vox
No some one created PFS and SFS. Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 11-Aug-2012 at 09:07 PM.
_________________ Software developer and forum troll. Please check out my software: Excalibur, Basilisk 2, AmigaInputAnywhere. |
|
| Status: Offline |
|
|
number6
|  |
Re: This is not right Posted on 11-Aug-2012 21:10:11
| | [ #29 ] |
|
|
 |
Elite Member  |
Joined: 25-Mar-2005 Posts: 7999
From: In the village | | |
|
| |
| Status: Offline |
|
|
vox
|  |
Re: This is not right Posted on 11-Aug-2012 21:10:51
| | [ #30 ] |
|
|
 |
Elite Member  |
Joined: 12-Jun-2005 Posts: 3188
From: Belgrade, Serbia | | |
|
| @NutsAboutAmiga
Quote:
| No some one created PFS and SFS. |
OK but these are external file systems.
When FFS got this problem removed? I assume with OS 4.0 and 4.1
Its good to know PFS and SFS had this limit overcomed, but they never went official, even are great and still developing. Personally I would include them with OS, JXFS seems not to have any recovery tools and isn`t way better then those two veterans._________________ AF 2012, Hollywood Designer 5, AmigaOS 3.5,4.0 and 4.1 registered user, user of Linux Mint 13 Roots Taking Over The World |
|
| Status: Offline |
|
|
vox
|  |
Re: This is not right Posted on 11-Aug-2012 21:14:03
| | [ #31 ] |
|
|
 |
Elite Member  |
Joined: 12-Jun-2005 Posts: 3188
From: Belgrade, Serbia | | |
|
| @number6
Quote:
| AmigaDOS (dos.library): 102, plus 5 reserved for ".info" files Workbench/Fast File System (FFS): 25, plus 5 reserved for ".info" files Smart File System (SFS): 95, plus 5 reserved for ".info" files Professional File System (PFS): 102, plus 5 reserved for ".info" files (PFS has a minimum of 31 characters) Ami-File Safe (AFS): diskname length - 32, filename length - 96, comment length - 80 |
Thanks, but none is 200+ as originally mentioned. Its way better then 8+3, even Win95 limit but not yet to what Wiki article mentions. So we need to correct what "long file name" actually is.
Then this section needs a bit rework http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AmigaDOS#File_systems
Who will do the work?_________________ AF 2012, Hollywood Designer 5, AmigaOS 3.5,4.0 and 4.1 registered user, user of Linux Mint 13 Roots Taking Over The World |
|
| Status: Offline |
|
|
itix
|  |
Re: This is not right Posted on 11-Aug-2012 21:23:24
| | [ #32 ] |
|
|
 |
Elite Member  |
Joined: 22-Dec-2004 Posts: 2596
From: Freedom world | | |
|
| @vox
System internals always supported up to 107 characters but at least Workbench didnt allow using more than 30 characters when naming files. I dont know if any of those details were addressed in later (WB 2.x or 3.x) versions.
I dont remember if accessories or shell commands had some limitations. Official documentation always mentioned 30 character limit.
_________________ Free IRC client for Amiga: www.amirc.org |
|
| Status: Offline |
|
|
NutsAboutAmiga
|  |
Re: This is not right Posted on 11-Aug-2012 21:27:12
| | [ #33 ] |
|
|
 |
Elite Member  |
Joined: 9-Jun-2004 Posts: 8684
From: Norway | | |
|
| @vox
(HFS) CrossMac has 31 chars. _________________ Software developer and forum troll. Please check out my software: Excalibur, Basilisk 2, AmigaInputAnywhere. |
|
| Status: Offline |
|
|
Franko
|  |
Re: This is not right Posted on 11-Aug-2012 22:50:50
| | [ #34 ] |
|
|
 |
Elite Member  |
Joined: 29-Jun-2010 Posts: 2809
From: Unknown | | |
|
| |
| Status: Offline |
|
|
Franko
|  |
Re: This is not right Posted on 11-Aug-2012 22:55:22
| | [ #35 ] |
|
|
 |
Elite Member  |
Joined: 29-Jun-2010 Posts: 2809
From: Unknown | | |
|
| @vox
Quote:
vox wrote:
Thanks, but none is 200+ as originally mentioned. Its way better then 8+3, even Win95 limit but not yet to what Wiki article mentions. So we need to correct what "long file name" actually is. |
Thing is Vox, if like me you were never daft enough to own or use a PC then being limited to only 8+3 characters doesn't matter and matters even less so when we're talking about the Amiga... 
So there is no need to define what a "long filename" actually means on an Amiga Wiki page, if you want to know that then look up a Wiki page about the PC...  _________________
|
|
| Status: Offline |
|
|
wawa
|  |
Re: This is not right Posted on 11-Aug-2012 22:59:58
| | [ #36 ] |
|
|
 |
Elite Member  |
Joined: 21-Jan-2008 Posts: 3515
From: Unknown | | |
|
| @Franko
funny that i actually believe today 25 characters is enough for a filename. i am absing these limits enough on pc and still i cant use "?" in there, how about that?? |
|
| Status: Offline |
|
|
Franko
|  |
Re: This is not right Posted on 11-Aug-2012 23:10:22
| | [ #37 ] |
|
|
 |
Elite Member  |
Joined: 29-Jun-2010 Posts: 2809
From: Unknown | | |
|
| @wawa
I always stick to the standard filename limit that a bog standard Amiga can handle myself... 
The only time problems occurs are when trying to read CDs/DVDs that were burnt on a PC using long filenames for example. other than that the Amiga for me has always had more than enough character space for file names as standard...  _________________
|
|
| Status: Offline |
|
|
vox
|  |
Re: This is not right Posted on 12-Aug-2012 0:02:31
| | [ #38 ] |
|
|
 |
Elite Member  |
Joined: 12-Jun-2005 Posts: 3188
From: Belgrade, Serbia | | |
|
| @Franko
You could not escape awful destiny of being forced to use Win95. But love the way they killed Bill Gates in South Park, Bigger, Uncut ...
Quote:
| Like I have said, the only time AmigaOS ever came with support for long filenames as standard was when OS4.0 was introduced... |
OK, so as usual, community polished the downsides of CBM (what good is if system internals supported 107 if real use limit is 30? = 30 chars).
Hope this, amongst other improvements, will bring ya as some future OS 4.0/MOS user Its good to see each small portion of OS advancing (same goes for AROS and MOS).
Now, OK lets say article is OK if we put number 30 in that part. Maybe having some link to AmigaOS 4 alongside MOS and AROS in first section.
What else? Article is fairly good to my eyes._________________ AF 2012, Hollywood Designer 5, AmigaOS 3.5,4.0 and 4.1 registered user, user of Linux Mint 13 Roots Taking Over The World |
|
| Status: Offline |
|
|
Seiya
|  |
Re: This is not right Posted on 12-Aug-2012 0:09:06
| | [ #39 ] |
|
|
 |
Cult Member  |
Joined: 19-Aug-2006 Posts: 821
From: Italia | | |
|
| Franko wrote: Quote:
@QuikSanz
I've no idea why anyone would take anything said on a "Wiki" page seriously... 
|
Amiga is only Amiga Classics no other Amiga NG that are common PC with a PPC instead of x86... So in Wikipedia you can only read what was "Amiga".
Last edited by Seiya on 12-Aug-2012 at 10:12 PM.
_________________
|
|
| Status: Offline |
|
|
Franko
|  |
Re: This is not right Posted on 12-Aug-2012 0:13:51
| | [ #40 ] |
|
|
 |
Elite Member  |
Joined: 29-Jun-2010 Posts: 2809
From: Unknown | | |
|
| @vox
Quote:
vox wrote: @Franko
You could not escape awful destiny of being forced to use Win95. |
I did...  _________________
|
|
| Status: Offline |
|
|