From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stas Sergeev Subject: Re: Bug in the latest version Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 12:41:15 +0300 Sender: linux-msdos-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <3DBD063B.4050005@yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed" To: linux-msdos@vger.kernel.org Hello. Hartmut Figge wrote: >> It doesn't *cure* the problem, because >> the real problem is an exepack's bugs >> and not the default DOS loader. > To clarify: it cured the problem with pushover. Or should i say, it > circumvented the problem caused by exepack? That sounds better:) > Can we agree, that there are cases, in which loadfix will work? Sure, but it is not the real fix. It can work around the "packed file corrupt" problem, but I am just wondering why people prefer that "solution", if unpacking exe is a permanent fix, i.e. you will have to do that only once, you will not be affected by another exepack bugs etc. What I was actually arguing against, is this: > That cured the problem with the 'corrupte file' and was the only way, > to use that game. It was neither the only, nor the best way in fact. I never argued it can work around "packed file corrupt" problem, but when the real fix exists, loadfix seems useless to me. loadfix is a kind of a bug-to-bug annihilation, not the fix.