on 7/12/01 9:21 AM, gabriel rosenkoetter at gr@eclipsed.net wrote:


> This might be because boot1.fs is actually floppy-sized while
> boot2.fs is about 600 KB, or it might be because Disk Copy is
> actually analyzing the content of the file a bit.

Disk Copy analyses if it is a HFS filesystem. I have several HFS images
smaller than 600 k and the program recognizes them (minimum 799 blocks of
512 bytes).

> This confirms that Disk Copy didn't get smarter, but rather stupider: "Hey,
> I'll write *any* 1440 KB file to a disk. If it's not a disk image, that's the
> user's fault!"

I totally agree. If Apple is playing with Un*x, would make things more
compatible.

> This is relevant to macppc because if anybody's trying to make a
> set of i386 floppies to boot some random old hardware they find,
> they can't do it at all on a mac, running MacOS or NetBSD. (Well,
> until someone gets around to writing some swim drivers. ;^>) It's
> also spooky, since we'd been talking about using ustarfs to split
> the floppy in the same way that i386 does. If we do that, we'll have
> to make sure we pad out the second disk to 1440 KB, or we'll have to
> explain that Disk Copy won't work for the second disk.

Suntar for me is perfect.

> "You can use Disk Copy 6.3.3--or earlier? has anyone tried
> that?--

I used Disk Copy 6.2 and also works.



Carlos Portela