Re: [Freedos-user] More FreeDOS FDISK tests - failure is repeatable

2005-07-23 Thread Johnson Lam
On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 15:29:04 +0100, you wrote: Hi Gerry, It's just I have to build 30 PCs in coming weeks, plus some production servers, and plan to use FreeDOS FDISK to partition them. I was a bit worried reading about this bug, but all my hard drives are brand new, so should be OK. If you

[Freedos-user] re: More FreeDOS FDISK tests - failure is repeatable

2005-07-23 Thread Eric Auer
Hi, I think you will be safe as you apply FDISK to NEW harddisks: The problem is only that if you get a read error while reading the existing partition scheme, our FDISK has the stupid strategy to write a new empty partition table as automatic solution. Your new PCs should not show read errors

Re: [Freedos-user] announce: devload 3.14

2005-07-23 Thread Aitor Santamaría Merino
Hi, Eric Auer escribió: Please test if your devices can still be loaded with the new DEVLOAD version (DEVLOAD allows you to load devices from the prompt which otherwise would be loaded with DEVICE= or DEVICEHIGH=, but note that UMB support is limited, memory drivers like HIMEM / EMM386 should

Re: [Freedos-user] More FreeDOS FDISK tests - failure is repeatable

2005-07-23 Thread kd4d
This may be a side effect of memory corruption with EMM386. In fact, it appears to be a result of some interaction with EMM386. I do not believe the hard disk in question is faulty and I do not believe that it has non-standard parameters. I do not believe the memory corruption is due to the hard

Re: [Freedos-user] More FreeDOS FDISK tests - failure is repeatable

2005-07-23 Thread Kenneth J. Davis
Michael Devore wrote: At 04:01 PM 7/21/2005 -0500, I wrote: When you invoke FDISK without arguments, it goes into the Interactive_User_Interface() routine. That, in turn, asks about FAT32 support, via Ask_User_About_FAT32_Support() function. OK so far. After that call -- without any

Re: [Freedos-user] More FreeDOS FDISK tests - failure is repeatable

2005-07-23 Thread Michael Devore
At 11:33 PM 7/23/2005 +, you wrote: This may be a side effect of memory corruption with EMM386. In fact, it appears to be a result of some interaction with EMM386. I do not believe the hard disk in question is faulty and I do not believe that it has non-standard parameters. Doubtful.