On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 11:54 AM, Iruata Souza<iru.mu...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 9:50 AM, matt<maht-9f...@maht0x0r.net> wrote: >> erik quanstrom wrote: >> >>> i love it. we have complaining that fat doesn't do more >>> than 8.3 and trolling that there's a patent liability for >>> doing more than 8.3 within 24 hrs. >>> >> >> thanks but I'm not trolling, not complaining >> >>> just to be clear. fat itself is not patented. just some >>> particular aspects of a 8.3 workaround. >>> >>> >>>> >>>> though maybe the inability to do fat32 will save you. >>>> >>> >>> dossrv and 9load both read fat32. >>> >> >> I was refering to format not dossrv >> >> BUGS >> Format can create FAT12 and FAT16 file systems, but not >> FAT32 file systems. The boot block can only read from FAT12 >> and FAT16 file systems. >> >>> >>>> >>>> I like the sound of the sector 1 idea, I'm sure making a tool to r/w it >>>> in Linux / whatever can't be hard. >>>> >>> >>> i think that's the point of using fat. no tools required. >>> >> >> No tools except a second OS installed on your machine / one you can plug >> your disk in to >> >>> you're already in a pickle if you've gotten to this point. >>> consider the acer inspire machine this week that >> >> but as you say here, if you're having trouble, you need something to help >> you. The great help you've been giving people here was via iso files >> >> Anyway, there are good arguments on both sides. There's only one way to >> solve this : >> >> FIGHT >> > > i fought myself. > pbs32 (9null's pbs) now works with 9fat without caring about it. > it loops reading a block and checking for the a.out(8) signature. if > the 9pcload is on 9fat, not a problem anymore. >
a.out(6), sorry
