Mail Archives: djgpp-workers/2000/12/29/08:58:01
Hello!
> <quote from djgpp faq section 22.3>
> Patches to DJGPP programs and ports should be sent to the person who
> maintains the relevant package. Patches for the C library, utilities
> and other software which comes with the `djdevNNN.zip' distribution
> should be sent to DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com>. If you don't know who
> maintains a particular package or port, post the patches to
> comp.os.msdos.djgpp news group, since the maintainer is most probably
> reading that group.
> </quote>
Well the faq on www.delorie.com says:
"Patches to DJGPP programs and ports should be sent to the person who
maintains the relevant package. Patches for the C library, utilities
and other software which comes with the djdevNNN.zip distribution
should be sent to the DJGPP developers mailing list; please send them
as plain text, not as binary attachments."
So either that or your FAQ is outdated. Personally, I think, it makes
much more sense to send patches to libc to djgpp-workers.
> and BTW, I'll send patches as messages as you told me. FAQ says to run
> dtou over the patch to make it compatible with unix (that's where
> those '=0A=' came from).
Well, perhaps they wounln't have been there if you had refrained from
_attaching_ the patch. (Just guessing here.)
> BTW, what does rescaling do? You're calling two services (2136 and
> 217302) and then you only take free clusters values from 2136
> (rescaling of course) and bsize and blocks from 217302. Why? Can you
> please explain me how does rescaling work, and why it is more
> relialble than the 'free clusters' reported by 217302?
It's been a while but I think it had something to do with me noticing
that INT 21, AX=0x7302 wasn't quite accurate so I falled back to the
original code (which obviously had been working for years without
complaints on drives less than ~2GiB). Plus adjusting for another
blocks size as in the case of INT 21, AH=0x36 we get the blocksize in
32kiB but as we really want the blocksize 4kiB (FAT32) the free blocks
needs to be rescaled. However as the comments suggest the total free
space (according to INT 21, AH=0x36) stays the same. I convince myself
of this with some mental runs of the code, but I might be wrong.
> > Please say what you expected and what you got. (I suspect the
>
> what I expected from statfs? I expected that it was reporting the
> actual number of free clusters, 705145 at this time, instead I'm
> getting 655360 on this drive, the other one is reporting 322192 and
> chkdsk says 322197...
Yes, but on the network drives...
> I suspect (because docs doesn't says anything) that the service 217302
> reports the largest block of free clusters, not the actual number of
> free clusters, or is that or the service 217302 is buggy on my Windows
> version (4.10.1998)
That's what I'm using too. The English variant.
> The only documentation I have is from Ralf Brown's Interrupt List
> http://www.ctyme.com/rbrown.htm
Me too. I must have missed INT 21, AX=7303 or it was there when I did
this. I suspect the former.
> PS: please forgive me for my English, but is really hard (and time
> consuming) for me to express in English what I think in Spanish.
You're doing just fine. Many of us here on djgpp-workers have another
language than English as first language: Swedish, Latvian, Lithuanian,
Hebrew... (Forgive me if I missed some.)
Right,
MartinS
- Raw text -