BL> the philosophy of Bill Gates really annoys me!

BL> M$ uses "lock" when they mean unlock, and
"unlock" to lock it
NP> again), Windows produces an error telling me I'm using an old
NP> utility that might stuff the drive. For god's sake... that's
NP> what it's for! I *want* to stuff the drive, but bloody Win98
NP> won't let me!

BL> I *know* I can write it in Win98 using Delphi and a Win API
NP> call to write direct, but then it won't work in Win31 or DOS.

BL> I'm stuffed. I can't think of a way to get past Win98.

NP> Join the Club :-(

NP> My cleanup bat for all TMP WBK etc files on ALL drives on the
NP> network will freeze W98. So I run it from the old 386/33
NP> running DOS 6 WfWG and it works a treat. DOS 8 is the problem.
NP> It also sets the a attribute on any file that is used (as
NP> opposed to altered) bastards....

 I finally worked out how to make LOCK work... you have to write it
in assembler! And it has to be a single program (not a BAT) because
the LOCK is "owned" by the program. It runs beautifully under Win98
(in DOS) but not under Win31 which needs DOS6.

 Now I can't find a way to make it run as a Windows program in Win98
but I've lost interest. 

 It's really weird. I have to write it using a 16-bit compiler (BP7)
and there's no problem in DOS6, but it won't run in Win31. It runs in
Win98 in a DOS window but it won't run under Win98 as a windows
program. ROFL! It *must* be possible...

 What I said... it's the workaround-fuckup philosophy of Gates that
began with BASIC and *still* operates! My initial choice has proved
correct so far... keep Win31 and DOS6, write 16-bit programs and then
run them under Win98.

 The only thing that fucks Win98 is BAT files... everything else
seems to work.

Regards,
Bob



--- BQWK Alpha 0.5