You're probably right but let's hope for Chris' sake you're not.
Chuck Norcutt
Manuel Viet wrote:
> Le mardi 11 Juillet 2006 01:59, Chuck Norcutt a écrit :
>
>>I agree that's what a low level format should do but I've never heard
>>the words "low level format" except in your message.
>
>
> You're right ; I made an abuse of language. But last time I made a true low
> level format, I was 13 and it was on an XT with a ST506 board and a 20Mo RLL
> drive. For those who remember the (not so) good old days, this was done by a
> direct jump to a bios routine from DEBUG... Well. The XT still works all
> right... but not often.
>
> So, as I see it, there are 3 format types : true lowlevel (basicaly, this one
> lays tracks by hand on a disk, clearly does not apply to a random access
> chip), complete blanking, error checking of individual bytes, and writing of
> FAT structures (the one I called improperly low level), and simple erasing of
> root dir entries (the quick variant).
>
> As the latter was not the one used, there's only one possibility left...
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|