> From: Bruce Sommerset, on Sunday, November 24, 2019 12:23 AM, wrote...
>
> Use a program called 'Rufus', make sure the file you have is an image file
> (Ex: ISO, IMG, etc.)
>
> Rufus is a program that formats the sectors on the USB drive to make it
> bootable.
>
> Hope this helps.
On 11/24/2019 2:41 PM, Jon Brase wrote:
To expand on why CHKDSK itself can't deal with FAT32, Freedos tries to
retain compatibility with quite a broad range of hardware, including
both any 8086 machines that anybody still has lying around, and modern
hardware. So CHKDSK has to be able to be abl
On 11/24/2019 2:31 PM, Eric Auer wrote:
Hi Ralf and Dale, please check
http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/distributions/1.2/repos/pkg-html/dosfsck.html
to get an impression of dosfsck :-) While the DOS port
is old, it does know about LFN long file names and even
checks for
To expand on why CHKDSK itself can't deal with FAT32, Freedos tries to retain
compatibility with quite a broad range of hardware, including both any 8086
machines that anybody still has lying around, and modern hardware. So CHKDSK
has to be able to be able to work on 8086s. This means that it ca
Hi Ralf and Dale, please check
http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/distributions/1.2/repos/pkg-html/dosfsck.html
to get an impression of dosfsck :-) While the DOS port
is old, it does know about LFN long file names and even
checks for their consistency, as far as I remember.
On 11/24/2019 2:03 PM, Dale E Sterner wrote:
So why didn't freedos keep dosfsck; it its better?.
There isn't really anything to keep, it is a Linux program. And I recall
that there were issues with at least the early attempts to port this
Linux app to plain DOS IIRC, like causing corruption a
> So why didn't freedos keep dosfsck; it its better?
Hm? I expect FreeDOS to ship with both,
dosfsck and chkdsk! The former can do
fat32, but the latter is more familiar
classic DOS style, so both are good :-)
Eric
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Free
So why didn't freedos keep dosfsck; it its better?.
cheers
DS
On Sun, 24 Nov 2019 22:48:22 +0100 Eric Auer writes:
>
> Hi Dale,
>
> FAT32 has too large metadata to be convenient
> to handle for CHKDSK. Because of this, it is
> only supported by DOSFSCK, which requires a
> 386 or newer CPU a
On 11/24/2019 1:44 PM, Dale E Sterner wrote:
Why would Freedos be using a chkdsk that doesn't
work on fat32?
Because nobody has bothered to enable chkdsk to (safely!) work with
FAT32 partitions. And that is a much bigger task done properly than just
updating a few numbers to run over a larger
Hi Dale,
FAT32 has too large metadata to be convenient
to handle for CHKDSK. Because of this, it is
only supported by DOSFSCK, which requires a
386 or newer CPU and several MB of free RAM.
It has been a while since DOSFSCK got ported
to DOS, but I think you will be fine with the
older version w
Why would Freedos be using a chkdsk that doesn't
work on fat32? An that doesn't explain lchk's report
on line 16. I'm starting to wonder if freedos runs on
fat32 but doesn't support it -that seems strange
if its true.
That file you wanted so badly is c:\tcl86r2\clock.tcl
and its 152K not 1.5meg as
On Sun, Nov 24, 2019 at 3:49 PM Dale E Sterner wrote:
>
> I ran freedos chkdsk and it said:
> "fat32 not currently supported"
> This was on FREEdos1.2.
> Also lchk said on line 16 of its report:
> "FAT32 compatible disk access disabled"
> This was on FREEdos1.2 running on 32 gig cf chip
> with an
I ran freedos chkdsk and it said:
"fat32 not currently supported"
This was on FREEdos1.2.
Also lchk said on line 16 of its report:
"FAT32 compatible disk access disabled"
This was on FREEdos1.2 running on 32 gig cf chip
with an FAT32 format.
I'm not happy with the word "disabled"
Can you explain wh
13 matches
Mail list logo
