I had a lot of problems with thsfs as well. I got it to work on my Dos
6.2 doublespace drive after lots of work and kernel recompiling and such
and it is slow as hell.... I would almost call it unuseable. It's great
if you want to copy a little text document from DOS into unix but as soon
as you start dealing with any real quantities of data you can forget it.
I was going to copy my zipped up 4MB doom wad to my Linux partition and
at the rate it was going it would have taken well over an hour and a half
for four megs. I suspect the decompression algorithms thomas used in
thsfs are slow and very processor intensive. Theoretically it should be
possible to make a much quicker double space file system for Linux but
it's a matter of using the right algorithms I believe.
: I tried using it today, and am curious if anyone had better success. I
: was able to mount the CVF. I proceeded to do an ls, and it took a long
: time, but it worked. I switched into the WINDOWS directory, did an ls,
: and top showed that 'ls' was taking about 99% of the CPU! It didn't
: appear to do anything, but I made myself a cup of coffee, came back, and
: it had actually listed the directory.
: Then I did a "cd ..", did an ls, and it listed the same WINDOWS directory
: again, despite the fact that the present working directory in my prompt
: showed that I was not in the WINDOWS directory.
: At work I tried mounting a DOUBLSPACE partition that was actually using
: DOS 6.2 (as opposed to 6.0 on my home one) and it seg faulted.
: I realize this is just in testing phase, but has anyone got any decent,
: useful behavior out of thsfs? Seems like a very useful module, if only
: it worked a little better.
: .fvwmrc archive: ftp.netcom.com:/pub/td/tdgilman/Fvwmrcs
Todd C. Huss