mwm@violet.berkeley.edu (Mike Meyer) (03/05/87)
I wanted to be able to have an rrd in both fast and chip memory, so I set up vd1: identical to vd0:, except for BufMemType and HighCyl (as per the direction). Mount vd1: quietly does whatever mount does. Attempting to touch vd1: generates a "not a dos disk" error. Anyone else tried this? Any comments as to why it should happen? Better yet, got a fix? Thanx, <mike
perry@well.UUCP (Perry S. Kivolowitz) (03/07/87)
In article <2688@jade.BERKELEY.EDU>, mwm@violet.berkeley.edu (Mike Meyer) writes: > > I wanted to be able to have an rrd in both fast and chip memory, so I > set up vd1: identical to vd0:, except for BufMemType and HighCyl (as > per the direction). > > Mount vd1: quietly does whatever mount does. Attempting to touch vd1: > generates a "not a dos disk" error. Mike, it is in the code that no more than one vapordisk is allowed per machine. Since VD0: can be up to 8 megabytes in size (2 for the shareware version) and there's no head movement latency in ram I saw no need to allow more than one recoverable ram disk. Sorry if I made a rash assump- tion. Also, the Chris Erving memory hack (semi-fast ram) will not work with the RRD. In the code there are tests against 0x200000 for being the di- viding line between fast ram and chip ram. This used to be a valid test until Chris came along. Jeeze, who needed him! :-) :-) :-) I am working on the definitive rrd manual which will be sent to all share ware (registered) owners. It'll be 20+ pages or so it ought to be worth something. Please send in your shareware donations since to date we've only received about 20 registrations and we are pretty disappointed. As Mike's posting indicates there are things I could do to improve the rrd. For 20 $10 donations, I definately will not spend the time and make the result publically available again.