Hi!
22-Июл-2004 22:16 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (tom ehlert) wrote to "Arkady V.Belousov"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> Bernd and Eric many times report, that WHICHFAT utility behaves wrongly
te> and why didn't you fix it long ago ?
Because not all parts of kernel is well known for me.
>>>> LBA_Get_Drive_Parameters should NOT disable LBA access if heads or
>>>> sectors are > 64k
te>>> As I wrote this:
>> WHEN
te> why don't you go to HISTORY.TXT ?
Searching "LBA_Get_Drive_Parameters" inside history.txt... Not found.
Searching LBA... No mentions for suspicous values interpretation. May be,
above you was assume "_when_ I wrote this _code_"?
>>>> but should be mentioned in kernel docs (<-> DEVICEHIGH/LOADHIGH).
te>>> which kernel docs ?
>> config.txt?
te> this isn't an issue of *additional, non-standard* config.sys sysntax.
Anyway, Eric right - FreeDOS is not enough good texts with description
of different aspects (even if texts in some aspects will duplicate Pat's
book). For example, description for memory model (including issues with
standard RTL inclusion) is a very important thing, which should be
described.
BTW, Bart not answer, may be you: what happen when in OW will be fixed
bug with near (not far) calls to RTL functions? In this case current kernel
(with __U4M and __U4D in relocatable HMA_TEXT) will not work after
compilation.
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by BEA Weblogic Workshop
FREE Java Enterprise J2EE developer tools!
Get your free copy of BEA WebLogic Workshop 8.1 today.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idG21&alloc_id040&op=click
_______________________________________________
Freedos-kernel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-kernel
