> Unless of course DOS refuses to use (old?) drivers which do not
> advertise these functions. Someone knows ?
I find that a minimalistic approach almost always leads to problems and
compatibility issues. Even if you think a function/feature/API may not be
needed, it's still better to put it in
Hi, FreeDOS-devel !
Upon C. Masloch's harsh request\\kind invitation, I'm joining
Freedos-devel now and shall continue this question here that started in
Freedos-user. Apologies to anybody this change of venue may inconvenience.
--
On Mon, 20 Feb 2012 11:15
Hi Chris, Bertho,
>> Dear List... I'm calling back with respect to the 4k-sector USB disk
>> drive. I'm considering writing a loadable DOS 'block' driver for it, as
>> Eric Auer suggested.
>
> This doesn't belong on Freedos-user then.
Maybe Czerno / Bertho is not on freedos-devel? Or maybe
> Dear List... I'm calling back with respect to the 4k-sector USB disk
> drive. I'm considering writing a loadable DOS 'block' driver for it, as
> Eric Auer suggested.
This doesn't belong on Freedos-user then.
> I would like to take the simplest approach possible first, even at the
> expens
Bertho Grandpied wrote:
> Therefore my first interrogation is, what set of device header attributes
> - and associated functions, including IOCTL codes - must be present /at a
> minimum/ for letting DOS access the disk properly ?
>
> - For a tentative and probably naive self answer, could I get
Dear List... I'm calling back with respect to the 4k-sector USB disk drive. I'm
considering writing a loadable DOS 'block' driver for it, as Eric Auer
suggested. My experience with programming DOS driver is unfortunately more on
the side of character devices than block, so, please bear with basi
