Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 03:13:27 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Mike A. Harris" <mharris AT blackwidow DOT saultc DOT on DOT ca>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
cc: Brennan Bas Underwood <brennan AT mack DOT rt66 DOT com>, djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: Exclusive access to drive
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.970601200105.24881D-100000@is>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.95.970602031133.15240T-100000@capslock.com>
Organization: Total disorganization.
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Precedence: bulk

On Sun, 1 Jun 1997, Eli Zaretskii wrote:

> > I would assume this is because if you have files open and run chkdsk, it'll
> > bomb your hd like mad when it assumes it has exclusive right to modify the
> > naughty bits and goes ahead and goes at it. Then when you close your program
> > and it writes out the buffered data... pakow. So they attempt to save you from
> > yourself.
> 
> I suspect that, as usual, Microsoft tries to save me from myself a bit too
> well, because the same considerations apply when I run CHKDSK from DOS
> 6.x.  However, the version from 6.x doesn't say a word to that effect, and
> nothing bad really happens to my drive after running CHKDSK. 

Yes, but DOS 6.x is not a multitasking operating system with 50
different programs simultaneously accessing the hard disk, and
having open files, write caching, etc... either.  Window's '95
*IS*.  CHKDSK would destroy your hard disk guaranteed if you were
allowed to let it run.  


Mike A. Harris        |             http://blackwidow.saultc.on.ca/~mharris
Computer Consultant   |                  Coming soon: dynamic-IP-freedom...
My dynamic address: http://blackwidow.saultc.on.ca/~mharris/ip-address.html
Email: mharris at blackwidow.saultc.on.ca  <-- Spam proof address

Want Wordperfect for Linux? Visit Caldera's website: www.caldera.com