Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!uunet!mcsun!hp4nl!sci.kun.nl!cs.kun.nl!rhialto From: rhialto@cs.kun.nl (Olaf'Rhialto'Seibert) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.programmer Subject: Re: MSH on A3000 Message-ID: <3568@wn1.sci.kun.nl> Date: 22 May 91 19:00:19 GMT References: <896@macuni.mqcc.mq.oz> <21735@cbmvax.commodore.com> Sender: root@sci.kun.nl Organization: University of Nijmegen, The Netherlands Lines: 23 In article <21735@cbmvax.commodore.com> jesup@cbmvax.commodore.com (Randell Jesup) writes: > The actions involved would be: COPY_DIR (duplock), PARENT, >EXAMINE, and FREE_OBJECT (unlock). It also requires the fl_Volume pointer >to be set up correctly, and that Parent(root_lock) return 0 with dp_Res2 >of 0 (i.e. IoErr() of 0) - I suspect this is the problem. Yes, trying to get the parent of a 0 lock or a lock on the root directory is explicitly tested and diagnosed with ERROR_OBJECT_NOT_FOUND. Seems the logical thing to do. This is because 0 is equivalent to a lock on the root directory and therefore the returned value is not a parent of the given lock... it does not make any sense. > Note: Parent has always had to return those values, though less things >depended on them in the past. Oh? Is it in the AmigaDOS manual (Bantam)? If so, I must have missed it. But I suppose that ParentDir(0) does need to return an error? >Randell Jesup, Keeper of AmigaDos, Commodore Engineering. -- Olaf 'Rhialto' Seibert rhialto@cs.kun.nl How can you be so stupid if you're identical to me? -Robert Silverberg