> > By the way, IF you (Jon) are going to update the IDE disk variable area,
> > best do it good. It won't be compatible anyway, so I think it's a good
idea
> > to use OFFSET +4 +5 +6 +7 (for example) for the 32-bit disk size instead
of
> > OFFSET +4 +5 and +8 +9...
>
> by making the order '+4 +5 and +8 +9' like you say, you can keep it
> compatible with current bios1.x and 2.x utilities which use the IDE
> system variables. I can't see any advantage of using the normal order
> '+4 +5 +6 +7'. I almost all cases you use the IX/IY registers for
> reading the variables, so the actual offsetorder doesn't matter...
It will only be compatible with the older BIOSes for the A: drive. The rest
has to be calculated by multiplying the drive with 16 instead of 8, so if
you read the DIB of drive B:, one way or another, it will always give the
incorrect result if you use an older BIOS.
But now I see why it's not a good idea to combine the updates. I didn't know
the 'media-ID' was a required setting...
~Grauw
--
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<
email me: [EMAIL PROTECTED] or ICQ: 10196372
visit my homepage at http://grauw.blehq.org/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<
****
Problems? contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] See also http://www.faq.msxnet.org/
****
