You can also ask at the open dos/dr-dos mailing list: www.delorie.com
-----Urspr�ngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Bernie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
An: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Datum: Donnerstag, 23. M�rz 2000 18:38
Betreff: Re: Dr-Dos Fdisk Bug (was Re: Where o Where Is DOS)
>Bjorn Simonsen wrote:
>>I think you may be barking up the wrong tree here. Did you FDISK
>>your system with DR-DOS 7.03 or Dr/Open-DOS 7.02? If so - your
>>problem might be related to a bug in Dr-Dos fdisk.
>
>You forgot this recent (00-03-15) post by Matthias Paul (the person he's
>answering is Charles Dye)
>> As I recall, there were actually two issues with FDISK: it created
>> clusters larger than needed (that is, too few clusters) plus the
>> unrecognized OEM label. Neither problem was terribly significant
>> by itself; it was the interaction between the two that caused possibly
>> disastrous problems under MS-DOS.
>>
>> My guess is that a copy of FDISK patched in this fashion would avoid
>> the worst incompatibility problems, but would still result in wasted
>> space on small hard drives -- say, less than 128 megs. And of course
>> patching the OEM label on the drive itself won't fix the cluster size.
>
>This is correct. However, it s not only the OEM label that I changed
>in my personal issue of FDISK... ;-) Though it s not fully tested
>yet, the cluster size problem is gone too, and there are tons of
>other more or less significant changes, that make the user interface
>a bit more modern and easier to use, make FDISK more reliable in
>some situations, and improve compatibility with other FDISKs as of
>MS-DOS, PC DOS, OS/2, and even PTS/DOS. It is also more compatible
>with LOADER. Of course, there are also alot of new command line
>options. However, it s not yet finished, and it still does not yet
>support LBA by itself (I first want to finish all the other stuff,
>before I ll add this).
>//Bernie
>http://bernie.arachne.cz/ DOS programs, Star Wars ...
>
