This is what the source has to say:
#if 0 /* YES, this is too early, caused a sharing violation - 0.91q */
// Force_Drive_Recheck(); /* or is this too early??? - 0.91k */
#endif
So commented out as of 0.91q, to prevent a "sharing violation". I do not know
what sharing violation means in
Dumb question: Is there a source history that we can peruse and triage
where that call was commented out?
--
Kirn Gill II
Mobile: +1 813-300-2330 <+18133002330>
VoIP: +1 813-704-0420 <+18137040420>
Email: segin2...@gmail.com
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/pub/kirn-gill/32/49a/9a6
On Mon, Aug
Re-enabling the Force_Drive_Recheck() after bootsector write fixes the format
problem for the uninitialized 720K floppy in a 1.44M drive. However, as this
was commented out most probably for a good reason, unconditionally re-enabling
this does not look like the best idea. Any proposals?
> Am 2
On at 2024-06-02 19:45 +0200, E. C. Masloch wrote:
On at 2024-06-02 13:31 +0200, Bernd Böckmann via Freedos-devel wrote:
[...]
Thinking of this LBA, non-LBA thing we might investigate if it is
possible to merge the LBA and non-LBA FAT32 VBR code into one. But
that is for another topic. We
