Xref: utzoo comp.sys.amiga:75986 comp.sys.amiga.tech:17570 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!rutgers!cbmvax!cbmehq!cbmger!peterk From: peterk@cbmger.UUCP (Peter Kittel GERMANY) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga,comp.sys.amiga.tech Subject: Re: HD Errors Message-ID: <688@cbmger.UUCP> Date: 7 Jan 91 15:41:43 GMT References: <37492@cup.portal.com> <1991Jan2.190655.15790@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> <1991Jan3.141624.25450@forwiss.uni-passau.de> <1991Jan3.230319.3648@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> <17128@cbmvax.commodore.com> Reply-To: peterk@cbmger.UUCP (Peter Kittel GERMANY) Organization: Commodore Bueromaschinen GmbH, West Germany Lines: 18 In article <17128@cbmvax.commodore.com> jesup@cbmvax.commodore.com (Randell Jesup) writes: > BTW, I test new versions of Dos.library live on my development >machine (and the latest version of the FS Steve has released at a given >time), and have never trashed a drive or lost data. Well, the question always remains, who trashes the disk, a program or the DOS? I have a proposal for real hard tests: Go BASIC, take the SaveILBM program made by Carolyn and compile it with AC/Basic. This crashes your machine perfectly and with a good chance you are left with a corrupted disk (hit two of mine on one single day, but I succeeded to fix them with some self-made special proggies). I'm sure this is due to the compiler, but again, this calls DOS routines to get onto the disk. But perhaps it corrupts the stack, so that these calls run wild (pure guess). -- Best regards, Dr. Peter Kittel // E-Mail to \\ Only my personal opinions... Commodore Frankfurt, Germany \X/ {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!cbmger!peterk