Date: 2008-01-01 15:00:05

On 2007-12-31, at 19:54, Jim Brain wrote:

> As stated before, I'd prefer to see the drive contain a std IDE boot  
> sector

A little nitpicking - we probably all know what you mean but I  
wouldn't call it "IDE boot sector" or "IDE partition scheme" as you  
called it before. I believe the proper name is "PC-BIOS partition  
scheme" and "MBR". IDE can use _any_ partition scheme.

> (with partition info), and put this stuff at the sector noted by the  
> partition info.
> On the system-info sector, I'd be happy to look at 0x83, FAT,  
> IDEDOS, etc. to come up with a common FS-boot block if you want.

Sounds good.

>> My LBA system can support 256 and 512 bytes sized sectors: if the  
>> MS bit of the  4th byte of the link is set, then this sector is the  
>> last sector of a file. The first byte, in case of a 512-bytes sized  
>> sector the second byte as well, tells the system how many bytes of  
>> this sector are used.
> I'm assuming you're talking bit 31 of the link, right?  Hehe, that  
> means, of course, that one cannot use a sector above 1TB :-)  no  
> worries here.  The only practical way we'll get there is if someone  
> creates a partition on a >1TB disk near the end.  1TB disks being so  
> common and all, in PATA format...

We should start buying PATA harddrives with capacities lower than 1TB  
just like *NOW* - otherwise we may not be able to find a suitable  
drive for our (Ruud's) device available on the market when we decide  
we want one.. ;-)

>> I started with removing references to the second drive. I also want  
>> to remove all references to the disk ID. As I cannot swap a disk,  
>> why would we need a disk ID? Showing the directory, the first line  
>> will display:
> On the disk, I think that is fine.  However, I would still leave a  
> spot on the DIRectory block for the ID and DOS-type (2A), in case  
> someone wants to modify them.
>> 0 "DISKNAME        " X-IDE

That's quite similar to what IDE64 does.

>> 'DISKNAME' can be changed. Formatting of the disk can be done with  
>> and without the ID option. With ID the system only accepts the  
>> characters 'ID'. This because formatting a real disk will take  
>> quite some time. You can compare it with the quick option for DOS  
>> format.
>> When writing this, I already removed the write protection routines.  
>> But it just occurred to me it could come in handy. Your oppinion,  
>> please!

I think it may not be needed all too often but I'd remove it only when  
the available space become limiting - In other words - keep it now and  
remove along with those you start removing when you run out of space.

> I'm not sure I understand this.  You mean for "locked" files (>PRG)  
> and all?

I _think_ Ruud was about routines that handle write protection on the  
disk, right?

       Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list

Archive generated by hypermail pre-2.1.8.