Re: OLD kernel BUG with volume label? (MS works,2026..2027rc not)

X-Comment-To: Bart Oldeman

Hi!

5-Ноя-2002 20:00 [email protected] (Bart Oldeman) wrote to
[email protected]:

>>      ? Strange suggestion - 0 for missing name. MS-DOS returns same as above
>> (18,18,3,3,3) in both case of existing _other_ vlabel and none vlabels.
BO> I had the impression that for cx=8, the volume label was returned
BO> regardless of the path given at ds:dx.

     You wish to say, that label name always will be searched in current (or
root) directory?

BO> So that's not true.

     What "not true"? I quote for you results of concrete testing: in my
environment (MS-DOS 6.22 under W4WG, name with V[+A] attribite[s] in current
directory and no labels in root) I get 18,18,3,3,3 and no one 0. If these
results are insuffucient for you, I may make more tests - simply describe
what/how should be tested.

     Or you mean, that label should be equal to searched pattern?

BO> To conclude:
[...]
BO> Volume labels:
BO> if (cx & 8) then
BO>   DOS tries to match the pattern against the volume label in the root of
BO>   the drive. In this search the value of cx is ignored.

     Hm. More tests (LABEL present in current dir, ROOT present in root):

______________O\_/_________________________________\_/O______________
e 400 "label",0
e 400 ".\label",0
e 400 "root",0
e 400 ".\root",0
e 400 "none\label",0
e 400 "nobe\root",0
_____________________________________________________________________
              O/~\                                 /~\O

Result: first two=18, second two=0, last two=3. This mean, that MS-DOS at
least not ignores wrong pathes.

BO> a volume label may also have r/o and archive bits set.
BO> DR-DOS, unlike MS-DOS 7.1 treats root directory entries with the
BO> volume label bit set and (system or hidden) bits set ALSO as volume
BO> labels.
BO> This means that if the drive has no volume label, but does contain LFN
BO> entries in the root directory, then DRDOS displays a bogus volume label
BO> and MSDOS correctly says "no volume label".

     Not very so. :( As I already wrote, after installing Win95 on disk
without LFNs nor labels before I get dummy label (don't remember its name),
which seen by VC and LABEL utility and can't be deleted/renamed by them. B-\

BO> It is obvious that FreeDOS should mimic MSDOS and not DRDOS here.
BO> The only question: why does RBIL state "2" as a possible return value,
BO> where it seems to be impossible to get it?

     _Probably_ in some cases this value may be returned, especially through
plugins like network redirectors.