Rob Eaglestone wrote: > For the 8060, perhaps D86 could be used? Viz 8050, 8250 => D80, D82. Does the 8060 exist in the wild though? The entry on SWoC mentions 8060 (single drive, 750K), 8061 (dual drive, total capacity 1.6M), 8062 (dual drive, 3.2M) and 8280 (dual drive, 1M). If all that is correct, it appears we'd need D86 for 8060/8061 drives, D8? for 8062 drives and perhaps D88 for 8280 drives. Somehow I think it would be better to switch to five letter file extentions, even if those break MS-DOS compatibility. For that matter, D64 is illogical to start with as it is used to describe the 1541. There is also the mostly unknown 1543 (high density 1541) and the 3.5" drives 1561, 1563, 1565 but I don't know if they'd have a format/capacity that differs from the regular 1581? There also are 3.5" HD drives like 1582, 1590, 1591 but it might be pointless to define image containers for drives that barely ever made it past prototype stage. Those lucky fellows who got some floppy disks with content for those drives could probably name the images in an unique way without needing their own file extention. :-) Best regards Anders Carlsson Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing listReceived on 2014-01-27 16:01:24
Archive generated by hypermail 2.2.0.