> On Feb 12, 2020, at 5:37 PM, Mark Pizzolato <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Recent versions of the simh PDP11 will correctly auto size (RL01 vs RL02)
> disk containers that have or don’t have the DEC STD 144 bad block table at
> the end of the drive as long as the disk image has an RT11 file system on it.
> If it has an RT11 file system that fact will be reported.
>
> The prompt “Overwrite last track? [N]” is actually asking a question about
> whether the DEC STD 144 bad block table should be written. The default of
> “[N]” will create a 0 sized container file on simh v3.x and before. On simh
> 4.x, the container file will be created to the full size of the respective
> drive without regard to the answer to the “Overwrite last track? [N]”
> question.
>
> Maybe the message:
>
> ?DUP-F-Size function failed
>
> Happens when an empty container is provided (without a DEC STD 144 bad block
> info)…
>
> - Mark
That could be, but shouldn't the device type, if supplied, control what is
reported? And presumably that has a default, so if the container isn't
pre-extended the default type would apply.
The file system based auto-sizing lets SIMH figure out what the type is given
an undersized container and a file system it knows that allows it to deduce the
size. But without that you should still be able to force the size, right?
paul
_______________________________________________
Simh mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh
