From: Martin Str|mberg <ams AT ludd DOT luth DOT se>
Message-Id: <200101071244.NAA23331@father.ludd.luth.se>
Subject: Re: df <-> df r:/
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1010107142324.25836F-100000@is> from Eli Zaretskii at "Jan 7, 2001 02:29:11 pm"
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2001 13:44:37 +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

> > But I don't understand why we shouldn't report busy drives?
> 
> Since we cannot find a way to distinguish between a CD and a DVD, I'm 
> afraid we will break the code wrt to CDs.  That code was tricky to get 
> right (it took at least two major rewrites), so I'd hate to break it.

So you say there are CD drives that report busy and done (bit 8 and 9
set) and in that case there's no CD on the drive?

Otherwise I propose that we ignore only bit 9: "(status & ~(1<<9) ==
0x100)".


Right,

						MartinS