home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.cbm
- Path: sparky!uunet!UB.com!pacbell.com!decwrl!csus.edu!netcom.com!fuzzy
- From: fuzzy@netcom.com (Fuzzy Fox)
- Subject: Re: 2 Q's: BMI & SAVE@
- Message-ID: <1993Jan27.060956.413@netcom.com>
- Organization: Foxes 'R' Us - Seven locations to serve you
- References: <1993Jan17.192438.12044@netcom.com> <C17In9.28u@fulcrum.co.uk> <1993Jan22.062624.23025@netcom.com> <30370@optima.cs.arizona.edu> <1993Jan24.043922.20002@netcom.com> <1k0dmtINN9ij@uniwa.uwa.edu.au>
- Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 06:09:56 GMT
- Lines: 28
-
- john@gu.uwa.edu.au (John West) writes:
-
- >>Huh?? If you always SCRATCH the file then SAVE, you will not run into
- >>the @-save bug, because you're NOT USING @-save!! :)
-
- >For the very simple reason that the bug can appear in more than one place.
- >It is only known as the save@ bug because that is where it is most commonly
- >seen.
-
- No. It is known as the @-Save Bug because it appears in the @-Save
- code.
-
- >As far as I can tell from what people have been saying, the bug is caused by
- >a failure to correctly load/store the BAM if the drive number is omitted.
-
- You can look at what people say on the net, or you can look at what
- actually happens inside the drive. The choice is yours.
-
- >scratch-save is safer than save@, but it will still fail from time to time.
-
- I have hacked with 1541 DOS for a decade without seeing scratch-then-
- save cause any disk corruption. I must have phenomenal luck.
-
- --
- #ifdef TRUE | Fuzzy Fox fuzzy@netcom.com
- #define TRUE 0 | a.k.a. David DeSimone an207@cleveland.freenet.edu
- #define FALSE 1 |
- #endif | "911 Emergency Rescue Service - Can you hold, please?"
-