Article View: comp.os.msdos.misc
Article #3198Re: Why is erase *.* slower with 4dos.com than with command.com?
From: Archie Warnock
Date: Tue, 21 May 1991 15:46
Date: Tue, 21 May 1991 15:46
15 lines
1495 bytes
1495 bytes
In article <mHy021w164w@bluemoon.uucp>, bytehead@bluemoon.uucp (Bryan Price) writes... >Nope. DOS (COMMAND.COM) uses FCB's to do the deleting. If you use the And it's probably worth noting that Microshaft specifically warns developers _against_ continuing to use FCBs for such things, since file handles are now the "officially recognized" way of doing such things. The moral is, if you do what MS claims you have to do to be compatible, people will complain that the performance isn't good enough. Anyone still wondering why the FTC is investigating Microsoft? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Archie Warnock Internet: warnock@stars.gsfc.nasa.gov -- ST Systems Corp. SPAN: STARS::WARNOCK -- NASA/GSFC "Unix - JCL for the 90s"
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<5377@dftsrv.gsfc.nasa.gov>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sample.eng.ohio-state.edu!purdue!haven.umd.edu!mimsy!dftsrv!stars.gsfc.nasa.gov!warnockReferences:
<1991May20.143142.16378@monu0.cc.monash.edu.au> <mHy021w164w@bluemoon.uucp>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sample.eng.ohio-state.edu!purdue!haven.umd.edu!mimsy!dftsrv!stars.gsfc.nasa.gov!warnock From: warnock@stars.gsfc.nasa.gov (Archie Warnock) Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc Subject: Re: Why is erase *.* slower with 4dos.com than with command.com? Message-ID: <5377@dftsrv.gsfc.nasa.gov> Date: 21 May 91 15:46:21 GMT References: <1991May20.143142.16378@monu0.cc.monash.edu.au> <mHy021w164w@bluemoon.uucp> Sender: news@dftsrv.gsfc.nasa.gov Reply-To: warnock@stars.gsfc.nasa.gov Organization: ST Systems Corp. - NASA/LASP Lines: 15