On 1/24/06, Thordur I. Bjornsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ted Unangst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on Mon 23.Jan'06 at 19:19:46 -0800
> >
> > looking at netbsd, [snip]
>
> and a look at freebsd, wich is the same as netbsd:
> backup[65] = block[65]; /* XXX */
> if (memcmp(block + 11, backup + 11, 79)) {
> /* Correct? XXX */
>
> Did some very unsientific test regarding this and can
> (well, not really) confirm that this borkes with DOSBOOTBLOCKSIZE
> wich is 512.
>
> Should openbsd go with the flow here ?
>
Yes it should. This bug is annoying if you're trying to dual-boot with
windows and share a data partition. Anyway, this is the correct way
regardless of what the DOS boot block size is supposed to be since
Microsoft obviously just changed the definition without telling
anyone.
-Nick Guenther
