>>> > If NT really does what you describe... Well, small wonder that it's so
>>> > bloated.
>>>
>>> As far as I know, Chkdsk, the FS-specific checking DLLs, etc... are all
>>> user mode code. I don't know what mechanism Jeff is referring to re: auto
>>> invoking chkdsk on volume mounts, so I can't say how that's accomplished
>>> (probably makes a callback to user mode to invoke the utilities).
>>>
>>> -mike
>>>
>
>> Windows, here, both 95 and NT just do a chkdsk upon startup. Windows
>> doesn't have the notion of "mount". Maybe Win-2000 will have, but
>> nothing I've seen yet does.
>
>What you are saying ? OF COURSE 9X & NT HAS mount syscall. There are no
>mount utility, it's right, but mount syscall is there. And it will return
>to you is chkdsk/scandisk is needed (that is driver was not unmounted cleanly).
>Just like in Linux. The only difference is that you can mount something only
>on drive letter and not in directory...
Actually, from what I was just reading about Windows 2000,
Microsoft is adding a new innovative feature that they single
handedly came up with that allows you to "splice" a filesystem
onto a directory point.
I read that the reason was to do away with drive letters. So,
hats off to Microsoft for inventing this new concept of
"splicing" filesystems onto directories.
;o)
-- Mike A. Harris Linux advocate Computer Consultant GNU advocate Capslock Consulting Open Source advocateJoin the FreeMWare project - the goal to produce a FREE program in which you can run Windows 95/98/NT, and other operating systems.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/