From: Martin Str|mberg <ams AT ludd DOT luth DOT se>
Message-Id: <200101021936.UAA29029@father.ludd.luth.se>
Subject: Re: FAT32's extend flag remove for OS/2
In-Reply-To: <3791-Tue02Jan2001205459+0200-eliz@is.elta.co.il> from Eli Zaretskii at "Jan 2, 2001 08:54:59 pm"
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2001 20:36:54 +0100 (MET)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL54 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
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

According to Eli Zaretskii:
> 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.

So _open.c and friends and statfs.c should use _get_dos_version(0)?


Right,

						MartinS