forum.defence-force.org

Do you think that loading the three patch files one after the other, instead of as a merged one, would still work fine?

I reread again the issue with the PATCH.001 file and I think I'm starting to understand what is going on. Please correct me if my guesses are wrong.

It seems Sedoric has the option to create "multipart" files, where each part can have different start-end/exec addresses and flags. Files that can be created with the COPYM command and that are declaring different parts of the file, than can later be loaded at once, and the OS will take care of placing each part of the file in the proper address, as the descriptor states.

I've seen that PATCH.001 file directory entry in that disk declares 5 sectors, but then the first descriptor is only declaring 1 sector. Since I'm only fetching file pointers until reaching the number of file sectors declared in the descriptor header, I was completely missing the fact that PATCH.001 has more descriptor entries pointed by the first one.

So, in order to support this feature (I had no idea it existed), I will have to change a bit the internal sedoric file model, and also figure out a way to extract properly these merged files, providing some header metadata to be able to restore them back from an extracted file.

Am I completely wrong or do you think my guesses are reasonable?

I believe you are right, I did not know about the merged files either until last week.

+1 I think you're right.
I belive these "merged" files were created 1st to record BIG files, like accounts history, addresses, whatever.
Here André seemed to have used this feature in another way, to make a multipart file.

In the end it's probably technically the same thing, but used for two different purposes.

My knowledge about Sedoric is limited to launching a program, issuing a quit and then the ! Prefix, setting the INIST and (with a lot of effort) formatting disks

This kind of things I read about from time to time keep surprising me

Chema wrote: ↑Mon May 21, 2018 10:15 pm My knowledge about Sedoric is limited to launching a program, issuing a quit and then the ! Prefix, setting the INIST and (with a lot of effort) formatting disks
This kind of things I read about from time to time keep surprising me

I'm fully enjoying my new adventures in Oric-Land .. at the moment I'm working on "upgrading" an old Oric BASIC listing, similar to how DBug has been doing it with his Adventure game .. its a text interface, but I'm adding graphics to it, to make it a little more fun to use .. won't say what it is yet, but I do want to say that .. digging into things and coding for Oric again, its like having my teen years back again, albeit this time with an actual DOS to use, for saving and loading things, and so on .. last night I made a mental note of how cute it is to have an Oric floppy disk image that I feel the urge to back up, just as urgently as anything on my MacBook Pro, since it contains a ton of work .. and then to look at the contents of this disk as I've been working over the last few weeks and realise "hey, holy shit, I'm actually doing some serious development for the Oric right now" is a big source of joy ..

And yeah, my copy of the SEDORIC manual is definitely getting dog-eared at the moment .. all the commands I should know, feel I should be an expert on, but in actuality I have no clue about. I'll be damned if I can figure out how to copy a file from one disk to another .. but why does this lack of knowledge feel so good? Its because I seriously lusted after a disk drive in the 80's and never got one, so now .. having to boot up on this all again, so far from the party .. I dunno, feels subversive man. In a good way. In a GREAT way, in fact.

Anyway, back to the upgrading ..

ibisum wrote: ↑Tue May 22, 2018 9:34 am And yeah, my copy of the SEDORIC manual is definitely getting dog-eared at the moment .. all the commands I should know, feel I should be an expert on, but in actuality I have no clue about.

Do you have an actual english version of the manual?

On the library I only have the French version (and not a very good one - OCR formating got totally broken) on http://www.defence-force.org/computing/ ... /index.htm

I've decided to release version 0.6 with fixes to the known bugs and also able to retain the last used directory. Support for merged or multipart files will need some design changes, maybe by showing them as a collapsible entries in the file box, allowing to set the attributes of each part and/or add/extract parts of a given file. I will branch the current development to implement those deeper changes and keep bug fixing in the master branch.

Link to the newest version: https://github.com/teiram/oric-dsk-mana ... er-0.6.jar

Thank you all for your feedback and support.

I've just released version 0.7 with Oric DOS support. This means that the utility should be able to import the files of a DSK file with an OricDOS filesystem inside.
It can be found as usual in the Releases tab of the Github project. https://github.com/teiram/oric-dsk-mana ... er-0.7.jar

Roger that. In penance, perhaps I should consider porting ..

EDIT: I (Dbug) removed the previous messages regarding the Java runtime, no reason to pollute the author's tool forum since everybody have voiced their feelings. Thanks for your understanding (This is the second time in... 10 years, give or take that I do that, let's try to keep things clean so they can be used as useful references for other people.)

Hello,
Great work.

Hmmm,

I thought I remember how to use ORIC DSK Manager but apparently not: I got a DSK file with a few files on it, and I wanted to extract the files to save them as .TAP but what I get is a file that starts immediately by a 12 bytes header starting by SEDORIC..... and based on what ISS wrote on the other post on how to fix The Hobbit I did remove all that, and recreated the header (using header.exe).

It should be trivial to make a new version of the tool able to save with the proper header, that would make the tool so much more practical to use

Big fat +1.
@Dbug refreshed my memory - what I actually did was to change the export function removing the SEDORIC header.
IMHO it will be best to have the all 3 options for export: 1. as it is now, 2. as TAP file and 3. as plain binary.
This should be easy and I opened the request in github.