On Wed, 18 Dec 2002 08:51:48 +0100, Michal H. Tyc wrote:UV3K-�`
> Hi Glenn, Hi all,
> I found a bit of free space on my disk and prepared a FAT32
> partition (DRFAT32 doesn't load when it can't find any FAT32
> disk).��!
Yes, I also tried loading DRfat32 and found that it will not load
if it does not find a Fat32 partition.
(will find time soon to create one for testing)<g>
But your test seems to confirm that the problem is not with Fat32 itself.
> Here is the result with FreeDOS beta8 booted from floppy:
> <LI><A HREF="A:\*.*">A: (Floppy)</A> <I>5.25" 1.2 MB</I>
> <LI><A HREF="B:\*.*">B: (Floppy)</A> <I>3.5" 1.44 MB</I>
> <LI><A HREF="C:\*.*">C: DOS1</A> <I>Hard disk</I>
> <LI><A HREF="D:\*.*">D: DOSX1</A> <I>Hard disk</I>
> <LI><A HREF="E:\*.*">E: DOSX2</A> <I>Hard disk</I>
> <LI><A HREF="F:\*.*">F: DOSX3</A> <I>Hard disk</I>
> <LI><A HREF="G:\*.*">G: DOSX4</A> <I>Hard disk</I>
> <LI><A HREF="H:\*.*">H: DOSX5</A> <I>Hard disk</I>
> <LI><A HREF="I:\*.*">I: TEST_FAT32</A> <I>Hard disk</I>
> (no crash!)
> DR-DOS with DRFAT32 drivers also works fine. The only difference
> is, that WWWMAN identifies I: as a RAMdisk; I'd rather expect
> to see it as CD-ROM or Network drive, because it is the way how
> it is presented to DR-DOS kernel by the DRFAT32 redirector, but
> it doesn't harm of course (and is a bit off-topic here).
> Unfortunately, I've lost somewhere my floppy with OEM DR-DOS 7.04,
> which supports FAT32 natively in the kernel; it would be also
> worth trying, I think.
> Greetings,
> Michal
Your tests also seem to confirm that this problem is
not with Fat32 APIs in general.
And I have a feeling that it's not with the Fat32 API that's being
loaded by MsDos IO.SYS included with W95 v4.00.1111
More likely it's this....
clipped from 'mem /d' for v4.00.1111
Conventional Memory Detail:
Segment Total Name Type
------- ---------------- ----------- --------
000C9 5,120 (5K) MSDOS System Data
00209 25,856 (25K) IO System Data
1,024 (1K) Relocated EBIOS data
544 (1K) Sector buffer
464 (0K) Block device tables
480 (0K) Drive map table
_________________
Clipped from 'mem /d' for v4.00.950
Conventional Memory Detail:
Segment Total Name Type
------- ---------------- ----------- --------
000C9 5,040 (5K) MSDOS System Data
00204 25,584 (25K) IO System Data
1,024 (1K) Relocated EBIOS data
544 (1K) Sector buffer
304 (0K) Block device tables
480 (0K) Drive map table
________________
The difference between them is in the "block device tables" memory usage.
The "buggy" version is using 464 bytes.
While the "non buggy" version is only using 304 bytes.
Now... to diagnose exactly why that is. And exactly what is contained
in that extra 160 bytes. ;-)
--
Glenn
http://arachne.cz/
http://www.delorie.com/listserv/mime/
http://www.angelfire.com/id/glenndoom/download.htm
http://www.thispagecannotbedisplayed.com/
