Date: Sat, 26 Apr 1997 13:15:17 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> To: michaelh@cet.co.jp (Michael Hancock) Cc: joa@kuebart.stuttgart.netsurf.de, sysop@mixcom.com, hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: VFAT 32 support in msdosfs Message-ID: <199704262015.NAA07521@phaeton.artisoft.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.SV4.3.95.970426194404.23390A-100000@parkplace.cet.co.jp> from "Michael Hancock" at Apr 26, 97 07:46:08 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> By the time you add Unicode and security to Win95 you would have WinNT. Windows 95 already has Unicode. VFAT long names are stored as Unicode strings, and all of COM and 32 bit OLE pass around Unicode parameter strings with their marshallers. The security is problematic, but you *can* implement at least UNIX equivalent security on a Windows 95 system with login profiles, *if* you make a fake net provider and reverse engineer the password provider interface's manifest constants. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199704262015.NAA07521>