Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 10:36:29 -0700 From: JJ Behrens <jj@nttmcl.com> To: "Sameer R. Manek" <manek@ecst.csuchico.edu>, stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: very old bug Message-ID: <20020412103629.C11707@alicia.nttmcl.com> In-Reply-To: <LMEMIKHGPPEEMMMMGIENAEDHEFAA.manek@ecst.csuchico.edu>; from manek@ecst.csuchico.edu on Fri, Apr 12, 2002 at 03:33:54AM -0700 References: <87sn612vsh.fsf@basilikum.skogtun.org> <LMEMIKHGPPEEMMMMGIENAEDHEFAA.manek@ecst.csuchico.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > In fact, MS-DOS provide far superior support for floppies than Linux or > > > FreeBSD or any other Unix I've used. > > > > In what way? > > Perhaps in the way this thread has been discussing for the past 10 or so > posts? Namely the handling of error conditions, when dealing with a floppy > that has been write protected. > > In MS-DOS you weren't stuck in an endless loop of attempting to write to the > floppy. I fear that this is getting *way OT*, but: MS-DOS didn't mount the floppies. This problem is difficult because we *do* mount the floppies. However, mounting has a lot of benefits that MS-DOS doesn't provide. -jj -- Users of C++ should consider hanging themselves rather than shooting their legs off--it's best not to use C++ simply as a better C. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020412103629.C11707>