On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 5:28 AM, jasse...@itelefonica.com.br
jasse...@itelefonica.com.br wrote:
Liam Proven lpro...@gmail.com wrote:
Ahh, OK. Fair enough, that makes sense. The legal
layout for DOS, then, would be:
1 primary partition
1 extended partition
\
[logical drive][logical drive]
LFNs on FAT was a very clever hack! It's now generally forgotten that
it was Windows NT 3.5 that introduced the system, long before Windows
95.
I personally don't think LFN on FAT was clever at all. It broke many
programs that worked just fine before that, including Microsoft's own SCANDISK
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 3:44 PM, Bret Johnson bretj...@juno.com wrote:
LFNs on FAT was a very clever hack! It's now generally forgotten that
it was Windows NT 3.5 that introduced the system, long before Windows
95.
I personally don't think LFN on FAT was clever at all. It broke many
Em 20-05-2010 01:28, jasse...@itelefonica.com.br escreveu:
Liam Provenlpro...@gmail.com wrote:
Don't try to create 3 primary partitions - in DOS
terms, that is an illegal layout.
Interestingly, illegal in MSDOS and PCDOS, but
both FreeDOS and DRDOS accept this layout (I tested).
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 7:36 PM, Alain Mouette ala...@pobox.com wrote:
Em 20-05-2010 01:28, jasse...@itelefonica.com.br escreveu:
Liam Provenlpro...@gmail.com wrote:
Don't try to create 3 primary partitions - in DOS
terms, that is an illegal layout.
Interestingly, illegal in MSDOS and
Em 20-05-2010 15:44, Liam Proven escreveu:
You have been lucky. I have seen many incorrectly-partitioned systems
with multiple primaries where some drives were not visible, on various
versions of MS-DOS and up to Windows 95.
Not Lucky, just hard work. Partitions were invented without
