Aitor Santamari'a Merino escreveu:
Luchezar Georgiev escribio':
On Thu, 25 Mar 2004 20:08:32 -0300, Alain wrote:
about fat32 testing: I believe a working DOSFSCK 2.10 just what is needed (not what is whished for).
Actually, I agree! If Eric can say "FreeDOS SMARTDRV is LBACACHE", why not say "FreeDOS SCANDISK is DOSFSCK"? ;-) DOSFSCK is not a SCANDISK, but neither is LBACACHE a SMARTDRV!
Well, I'd say this case is more restrictive.
For LBACACHE one expects a commandline loadable program that acts as a disk cache. What people expects of SCANDISK is a user interface to disk scanning (otherwise why not rename it to CHKDSK32?).
But if you add a UI to LBACACHE, why not rename it to SCANDISK, something the users are more familiar with?
I disagree here: the important thing is to get the job done. After that if there is a nice interface, it can be great, but not essencial. In DR-DOS you only have one CHKDSK without UI. Why is the focus of scandisk on the interface I cannot imagine, even to the point of someone making an empty interface... ???
Alain
------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id=3638&op=click _______________________________________________ Freedos-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
