Note: We do need to explicitly close FCBs. Reasons are as follows: If we
; are running in the no-sharing no-network environment, we are simulating the
; 2.0 world and thus if the user doesn't close the file, that is his problem
; BUT... the cache remains in a state with garbage that may be reused by the
; next process. We scan the setand blast the ref counts of the FCBs we own.
;
; If sharing is loaded, then the following callto close process will
; correctly close all FCBs. We will then need to walk the list AFTER here.
;
; Finally, the following callto NET_Abort will cause an EOP to be sent to all
; known network resources. These resources are then responsible for cleaning
; up after this process.
;
; Sleazy, eh?~
I imagine that’s already a compatibility thing. If the os closed the file handles at that point but the program was expecting to do that, it might crash.
LOL, some of the comments in the source are gold.
https://github.com/microsoft/MS-DOS/blob/main/v4.0/src/DOS/ABORT.ASM
Note: We do need to explicitly close FCBs. Reasons are as follows: If we ; are running in the no-sharing no-network environment, we are simulating the ; 2.0 world and thus if the user doesn't close the file, that is his problem ; BUT... the cache remains in a state with garbage that may be reused by the ; next process. We scan the set and blast the ref counts of the FCBs we own. ; ; If sharing is loaded, then the following call to close process will ; correctly close all FCBs. We will then need to walk the list AFTER here. ; ; Finally, the following call to NET_Abort will cause an EOP to be sent to all ; known network resources. These resources are then responsible for cleaning ; up after this process. ; ; Sleazy, eh?~This is what people mean when they say hostile to users damn wow
I imagine that’s already a compatibility thing. If the os closed the file handles at that point but the program was expecting to do that, it might crash.