On 10/6/06, Kai Blin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Friday 06 October 2006 10:19, Tim Schmidt wrote:
> Again, works for me. I believe the only part missing for this case is
> the simulation. Of course, there's the added possibility that apps
> will go mucking about with data other apps care about, in which case a
> per-executable simulated device would be best.
Wouldn't that break on Windows, too? If I have have two apps that muck about
in my mbr, I expect them both to work, so they better do whatever they do in
a sane way. I don't see how this would be different for a simulated drive.
Yeah. you're right. I just don't trust every app that mucks about
with the MBR to be courteous and correct ;)
--tim
