Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

mfm decoder misses overlapped sectors #551

Open
tdaede opened this issue Aug 10, 2022 · 1 comment · May be fixed by #552
Open

mfm decoder misses overlapped sectors #551

tdaede opened this issue Aug 10, 2022 · 1 comment · May be fixed by #552

Comments

@tdaede
Copy link
Contributor

tdaede commented Aug 10, 2022

When sectors overlap, any track headers that are within the data region of the sector are missed entirely.

tdaede added a commit to tdaede/fluxengine that referenced this issue Aug 10, 2022
Fixes davidgiven#551.

This is important for some copy protection schemes.
tdaede added a commit to tdaede/fluxengine that referenced this issue Aug 10, 2022
Fixes davidgiven#551.

This is important for some copy protection schemes.
tdaede added a commit to tdaede/fluxengine that referenced this issue Aug 12, 2022
Fixes davidgiven#551.

This is important for some copy protection schemes.
tdaede added a commit to tdaede/fluxengine that referenced this issue Aug 16, 2022
Fixes davidgiven#551.

This is important for some copy protection schemes.
@davidgiven
Copy link
Owner

This is because start-of-record sequences are only detected while seeking for the next record, and are ignored when actually reading data (because they are actually valid data, just with non-standard disk pulses). A previous version of the decoder would actually slice the flux into records based on start-of-record sequences and then decode each one individually, which wouldn't have suffered from this problem, but that caused other problems --- I forget what.

tdaede added a commit to tdaede/fluxengine that referenced this issue Oct 28, 2022
Fixes davidgiven#551.

This is important for some copy protection schemes.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants