Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2001 20:54:59 +0200
From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Sender: halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il
To: Martin Str|mberg <ams AT ludd DOT luth DOT se>
Message-Id: <3791-Tue02Jan2001205459+0200-eliz@is.elta.co.il>
X-Mailer: Emacs 20.6 (via feedmail 8.3.emacs20_6 I) and Blat ver 1.8.6
CC: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to: <200101021646.RAA28521@father.ludd.luth.se> (message from Martin
	Str|mberg on Tue, 2 Jan 2001 17:46:29 +0100 (MET))
Subject: Re: FAT32's extend flag remove for OS/2
References:  <200101021646 DOT RAA28521 AT father DOT ludd DOT luth DOT se>
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

> From: Martin Str|mberg <ams AT ludd DOT luth DOT se>
> Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2001 17:46:29 +0100 (MET)
> 
> Isn't it better to use _get_dos_version(1) in the case in question,
> then?

It depends.  IMHO, you should only call _get_dos_version(1) if you
absolutely _must_ know the real DOS version.  That is, if using a
version reported by SETVER and such likes will crash and burn the
program.  For example, if you write code that depends on the exact
layout of some internal DOS data structure, which is
version-dependent.

However, if using the wrong version simply disables some feature, it's
not a reason good enough to call _get_dos_version(1), because that
issues an undocumented DOS call.  It is okay for DJGPP programs to
obey SETVER, in general.