To:	physmsa AT cantua DOT canterbury DOT ac DOT nz
Cc:	opendos AT delorie DOT com
References:	<199710202032 DOT JAA19004 AT cantua DOT canterbury DOT ac DOT nz>
Message-Id:	<AAenzIqmt7@mpak.convey.ru>
Organization:	International Brownian Movement
From:	"-= ArkanoiD =-" <ark AT mpak DOT convey DOT ru>
Date:	Tue, 21 Oct 97 01:34:16 +0300
Subject:	Re: disk devices (was ls, killing disk 0)
Lines:	38
MIME-Version:	1.0

nuqneH,

> Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 09:32:40 +1300
> From: physmsa AT cantua DOT canterbury DOT ac DOT nz (Mr M S Aitchison)
> Subject: Re: disk devices (was ls, killing disk 0)
> To: opendos AT delorie DOT com

[dd]

> > > This character file, is only usable in OS/2.
> > > Just as /dev/hda1 is only usable in a Unix.
> > > This is OS-dependend.
> > > DOS doesn't have these kind of files.
> >
> > Maybe it's a good idea to implement it?
>
> There aren't a lot of good reasons to implement "raw" disk device files
> like unix, since it risks people destroying things

I disagree. System should give people the ability to do anything, even
to destroy things. Can you imagine that done unintentionally?

You _can_ destroy your CMOS contents by writing to /dev/clock$ (i have that
done once: i was curious what happens if you write to /dev/clock$ and that
was _my_ problem when that happened,not an OS "misfeature") ,so /dev/clock$ is
evil?

> and most of the
> benfits are available via IO controil reads/writes that is already a
> feature of DOS.  A read-only subset of the OS/2 notion might be
> something though.

r/w. I want to be able to write images,not only to read them.
I copied hdd's once: dd if=/dev/hda0 of=/dev/hdb0 ;)
--- 
                                       _     _  _  _  _      _  _
   Must be a visit from the dead..     _| o |_ | | _|| |   / _||_|   |_ |_ |_
   CU in Hell ..........  Arkan#iD    |_  o  _||_| _||_| /   _|  | o |_||_||_|

- Raw text -