Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!jgreco
From: jgreco@csd4.milw.wisc.edu (Joe Greco)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.cbm
Subject: Re: Can REL files be copied?
Message-ID: <2156@csd4.milw.wisc.edu>
Date: 20 Apr 89 21:52:33 GMT
References: <2063.244810B4@isishq.FIDONET.ORG>
Sender: news@csd4.milw.wisc.edu
Reply-To: jgreco@csd4.milw.wisc.edu (Joe Greco)
Organization: Interstellar Telephone, Telegraph, and Telepath, Inc.
Lines: 30

In comp.sys.cbm article <2063.244810B4@isishq.FIDONET.ORG>, izot@f171.n221.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Geoffrey Welsh) wrote:
]
] > From: jgreco@csd4.milw.wisc.edu (Joe Greco)
] > Message-ID: <2023@csd4.milw.wisc.edu>
] 
] > Also note that one of the better ways of finding the max record length
] > is to open the physical directory file and LOOK.  That has the
] > disadvantage of not working with RAMDOS and some less than compatible
] > disk drives.
] 
]   The method discussed finds the number of records in the file, not the 
]number of bytes per record (which I think we'd all agree should be fetched 
]from the directory file).

I must have lost the line of thought  :-)  ...  I think you are wrong,
fetching the number of bytes per record should not necessarily be
fetched from the directory file!

One innovative technique I saw used once involved reading a single
record (preserving the length) of the source file, writing over it
'till error occured, then rewriting the correct data.  It was a little
more complex, and had the disadvantage of not working so well with
write protected disks.  ;-)

Anyone have a FOOLPROOF method?
--
jgreco@csd4.milw.wisc.edu		Joe Greco at FidoNet 1:154/200
USnail: 9905 W Montana Ave			     PunterNet Node 30 or 31
	West Allis, WI  53227-3329	"These aren't anybody's opinions."
Voice:	414/321-6184			Data: 414/321-9287 (Happy Hacker's BBS)