DOS ain't dead

Bug in FreeDOS FDISK 1.3.4 or BIOS? (Developers)

posted by boeckmann, Aachen, Germany, 21.11.2022, 11:21

The main problem seems to be independant from the creation of the extended partition. If I create the FAT32 partition FDISK says it is 2047 MB in size. After restarting FDISK it thinks the partition is 2055 MB in size. If I make any modifications, like setting the partition active, that modified partition size gets written to disk. That behaviour does not happen if FDISK is forced into CHS mode by giving the /x command line argument. So for me it seems anywhere in the LBA to CHS translation code of FDISK there may be an off-by-one error.

The second thing: The end CHS value of the extended partition, which is beyond the 8GB limit, seems to simply overflow. Is that common behaviour or should that better be set to 1023/255/63 to indicate an invalid entry?

Complete thread:

• Bug in FreeDOS FDISK 1.3.4 or BIOS? - boeckmann, 20.11.2022, 19:09 (Developers)
  • Bug in FreeDOS FDISK 1.3.4 or BIOS? - Japheth, 21.11.2022, 08:10
    • Bug in FreeDOS FDISK 1.3.4 or BIOS? - boeckmann, 21.11.2022, 11:21
      • Bug in FreeDOS FDISK 1.3.4 or BIOS? - Laaca, 21.11.2022, 18:21
        • Bug in FreeDOS FDISK 1.3.4 or BIOS? - fritz.mueller, 22.11.2022, 12:06
          • Bug in FreeDOS FDISK 1.3.4 or BIOS? - boeckmann, 23.11.2022, 14:36
            • Bug in FreeDOS FDISK 1.3.4 or BIOS? - tom, 23.11.2022, 16:22
              • Bug in FreeDOS FDISK 1.3.4 or BIOS? - boeckmann, 23.11.2022, 20:23
  • Bug in FreeDOS FDISK 1.3.4 or BIOS? - glennmcc, 23.11.2022, 19:55
    • Bug in FreeDOS FDISK 1.3.4 or BIOS? - boeckmann, 23.11.2022, 20:17
    • Bug in FreeDOS FDISK 1.3.4 or BIOS? - boeckmann, 23.11.2022, 20:52
      • Bug in FreeDOS FDISK 1.3.4 or BIOS? - boeckmann, 24.11.2022, 15:38
        • Bug in FreeDOS FDISK 1.3.4 or BIOS? - fritz.mueller, 24.11.2022, 18:47