• C

dos_getdiskfree and big drives under NT


I have to write a 16-bit program that should run under Win3.x, 95 and NT (MS-VC++ 1.51 or BC++ 3.1) that shows a disk drive size.

Here it is:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
/* DISK.C: This program displays information about the
   default disk drive.  */
#include <stdio.h>
#include <dos.h>

void main( void )
{  struct _diskfree_t drive;
   double TotSpace;

   _dos_getdiskfree( 0, &drive );
   TotSpace = (double) drive.total_clusters *
              (double) drive.sectors_per_cluster *
              (double) drive.bytes_per_sector;
   printf( "tot clusters : %u\n", drive.total_clusters );
   printf( "sect/cluster: %u\n",drive.sectors_per_cluster );
   printf( "bytes/sector: %u\n", drive.bytes_per_sector );
   printf( "total space : %lf\n", TotSpace );
}
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Under Win3.x and 95 the program works fine as well as under NT for small drives (850 Mb). But for bigger ones (1.2 Gb) under NT, the dos function _dos_getdiskfree() (dos_getdiskfree() under BC++3.1) always
returns a bad number of 31249 clusters (976.5 Mb - wrong).
I find this problem under NT3.51 or NT4.0.
 
I don't think it's a 16 bits limitation (the number of clusters is unsigned so : 65535 max clusters * 512 bytes/sector * 64 sectors/cluster > 2Gb and I should be able to get the drive space correctly).
 
- Is it a NT (un)known bug ? (If the answer is yes,
  does the MS Service Packs correct the problem .)
- Is there a work-around (remember the program MUST run
  under Win3.x, 95 and NT so ONLY 16BIT functions are
  allowed) ?

tintin022697Asked:
Who is Participating?
I wear a lot of hats...

"The solutions and answers provided on Experts Exchange have been extremely helpful to me over the last few years. I wear a lot of hats - Developer, Database Administrator, Help Desk, etc., so I know a lot of things but not a lot about one thing. Experts Exchange gives me answers from people who do know a lot about one thing, in a easy to use platform." -Todd S.

jrcookCommented:
I compiled your program using BC 5.0.  I tested it undef Win95 and WinNT 3.51.  I verified that it fails to report the correct answer for a large disk on NT.  I tried it on a 3.1GB NTFS drive.

If your problem only occurs on an NTFS drive (not FAT), then the problem might be that NTFS can use more than 64K clusters on a drive.  Thus, returning the number of clusters to a 16-bit unsigned WILL overflow.

FAT drives are limited to 64K clusters, NTFS is not.  If this is your problem, there is no workaround, and 16-bit is not going to give you the correct answer.  Sorry.

0

Experts Exchange Solution brought to you by

Your issues matter to us.

Facing a tech roadblock? Get the help and guidance you need from experienced professionals who care. Ask your question anytime, anywhere, with no hassle.

Start your 7-day free trial
It's more than this solution.Get answers and train to solve all your tech problems - anytime, anywhere.Try it for free Edge Out The Competitionfor your dream job with proven skills and certifications.Get started today Stand Outas the employee with proven skills.Start learning today for free Move Your Career Forwardwith certification training in the latest technologies.Start your trial today
C

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.

Question has a verified solution.

Are you are experiencing a similar issue? Get a personalized answer when you ask a related question.

Have a better answer? Share it in a comment.