RE: 1581 loosing data

From: Ulf Diabelez Harries (Ulf_at_harries.dk)
Date: 2006-03-29 20:43:19

I just did a quick test, well as quick as the 1581 will allow me anyways
;-)

I created a disk with 52 files of 60 blocks each leaving 40 blocks free.
Then I wrote the last 60 block file resulting in the open file of 0
blocks.
After I did the validation, only the last file was removed. So in other
words, it seems to work as expected for me.


The details:

The 1581 I tested on is a CBM DOS V10.
The disk was created by saving a 60 block file to a freshly formatted
1581 disk and then copying the file 51 times using "C:newfile=oldfile"
as follows:

  LOAD "SOME60BLOCKFILE",8
  SAVE "FILE 0 ",8

  10 OPEN 15,8,15
  20 FOR I=1 TO 51
  30 PRINT #15,"C:FILE"I"=FILE 0 "
  40 NEXT I
  50 CLOSE 15

RUN'ing that took about an hour I guess ;-)

Then:

  SAVE "LASTFILE",8
  LOAD"$",8

- to confirm the
    ...
    0  "LASTFILE"      *PRG
..line in the directory list

And finally after validating:

  OPEN 15,8,15,"V0"
  CLOSE 15

- only the last entry was removed.


You will of course have to draw your own conclusions from this as I do
not know how your disk was created. Not that it would help me providing
an answer anyway ;-)
My personal experience with 1581 is that it quite often screws up the
directory. If this is due to a crappy DOS or caused by crappy disks I
don't know. I have never actually taken the time to investigate what
exactly goes wrong, but I would like to hear of other peoples experinces
in regards to its stability.


Best Regards
Ulf D. Harries

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-cbm-hackers@ling.gu.se 
> [mailto:owner-cbm-hackers@ling.gu.se] On Behalf Of Spiro Trikaliotis
> Sent: Wednesday 29. March 2006 13:36
> To: cbm-hackers mainling list
> Subject: 1581 loosing data
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I know the 1581 is known to loose data in some ROM versions. Anyway, I
> did not find any details in how this can happen.
> 
> Today, I encountered the following problem:
> 
> 1. I have a disc which contained some files:
> 
>    0 ."test            " 45 3d
>    83   "f0"               prg
>    83   "f1"               prg
>    83   "f2"               prg
>    83   "f3"               prg
>    83   "f4"               prg
>    83   "f5"               prg
>    83   "f6"               prg
>    83   "f7"               prg
>    83   "f8"               prg
>    83   "f9"               prg
>    83   "f10"              prg
>    [...]
>    83   "f33"              prg
>    83   "f34"              prg
>    83   "f35"              prg
>    83   "f36"              prg
>    83   "f37"              prg
>    6 blocks free.
>    00, ok,00,00
> 
>    That is, it contained 38 files, each 83 blocks, that it was almost
>    full; only 6 blocks were unused.
> 
> 2. I copied some file on the disc; the file did not have enough room,
>    thus, I got the following new contents:
> 
>    0 ."test            " 45 3d
>    83   "f0"               prg
>    83   "f1"               prg
>    [...]
>    83   "f36"              prg
>    83   "f37"              prg
>    0    "test"            *prg
>    0 blocks free.
>    00, ok,00,00
> 
> 3. Now, I validated the disc to free the blocks used by the 
> half-written
>    file (the equivalent to OPEN 1,8,15,"V0")
> 
> 4. After this, my directory only contained the first 8 files:
>    0 ."test            " 45 3d
>    83   "f0"               prg
>    83   "f1"               prg
>    83   "f2"               prg
>    83   "f3"               prg
>    83   "f4"               prg
>    83   "f5"               prg
>    83   "f6"               prg
>    83   "f7"               prg
>    2496 blocks free.
>    00, ok,00,00
> 
> That is, the validate deleted the files "f8" to "f37", along with
> "test".
> 
> Has anyone seen exactly this behaviour? Is the validate command in the
> 1581 known to delete files it should not delete? Or was the 
> structure on
> the 1581 wrong?
> 
> Any help is highly appreciated.
> 
> Regards,
>    Spiro.
> 
> -- 
> Spiro R. Trikaliotis
> http://www.trikaliotis.net/
> http://cbm4win.sf.net/
> 
>        Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list
> 


       Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list

Archive generated by hypermail pre-2.1.8.