Re: [hatari-devel] Fforce() fails with GEMDOS drive emulation

[ Thread Index | Date Index | More Archives ]


On lauantai 16 maaliskuu 2013, Eero Tamminen wrote:
> Mupfel:
> GEMDOS 0x3C Fcreate("c:\test.tst", 0x0)
> -> FD 64 (read/write)
> GEMDOS 0x40 Fwrite(64, 1, 0x71cfa)
> GEMDOS 0x42 Fseek(0, 64, 0)
> GEMDOS 0x46 Fforce(2, 64)
> ... pexec etc. ...
> GEMDOS 0x4C Pterm(0)
> GEMDOS 0x19 Dgetdrv()
> GEMDOS 0x0E Dsetdrv(0x2)
> GEMDOS 0x46 Fforce(2, 65535)

This is a bit wierd.  Compedium says:
	GSH_BIOSCON  -1   Refers to BIOS handle 2. This handle may only be
					  redirected under the presence of MiNT. Doing so
					  redirects output of the BIOS.

I hope normal TOS is returning EIHNDL error here.

> GEMDOS 0x42 Fseek(0, 64, 1)
> GEMDOS 0x3E Fclose(64)

Closing the file handle will remove the Hatari redirection,
and should work under TOS too, unless above Fforce() had
some effect.

> Gulam just creates a new file handle on each re-direction without
> closing the redirected handle after redirected command has
> completed.  And redirection worked with none of its internal
> commands, not even on floppy image.
> Any idea whether Fforce() on real TOS affect also BIOS output
> functions, not just GEMDOS ones?  With all TOS versions?

Based on above Compedium comment I would assume that normally it doesn't
affect BIOS (unless under MiNT and using negative handles).

That could explain why Gulam's internal commands output doesn't work,
if they use BIOS for output instead of GEMDOS...

	- Eero

Mail converted by MHonArc 2.6.19+