[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: More on 6809 board.
- Subject: Re: More on 6809 board.
- From: Steve Nickolas <usotsuki@buric.co>
- Date: Sat, 21 Jul 2012 06:26:25 +0200
- Bytes: 2395
- Cancel-lock: sha1:D92H0rmveJ3C0nB7cTv9jCOjkSY=
- In-reply-to: <jud90k$m6s$1@speranza.aioe.org>
- Injection-info: mx04.eternal-september.org; posting-host="07a92592f03664f9edeb8938900d6149"; logging-data="4518"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX191vdYGVj0zPzCTj+X53NgBmxmOLil80Ok="
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2
- Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
- References: <jucksg$gm8$1@speranza.aioe.org> <1162196466364529190.604761mjmahon-aol.com@news.giganews.com> <jud90k$m6s$1@speranza.aioe.org>
- User-agent: Alpine 2.00 (DEB 1167 2008-08-23)
On Fri, 20 Jul 2012, Alex Freed wrote:
Also can somebody explain the .DO/.PO thing to me? I looked at the Beneath
DOS and Beneath ProDOS and they claim that both DOS 3.3 and ProDOS do not
have any physical interleave but have (different) logical interleave. So the
physical sector are consecutive. Fine. Then why 2 different formats? If
physical data is written sequentially then the OS can apply whatever physical
to logical translation it wants, right?
-Alex.
That's the thing.
DO images are read in the sector order seen from DOS, and PO images are
read in teh sector order seen from ProDOS. This is after the logical
interleaving is applied.
-uso.