Comment 7 for bug 43941

Sivan,

I think you (we?) could do a strategy somewhat including both 1) and
2)... We could create a more generalistic solution to the problem so
that the application wouldn't crash, as it has happened on my test
case... Then there could be more specific handling for sotrage types we
get in touch with... i.e. now that we have an zip-drive on my computer
to test, it's a great opportunity to code for it.. Whenever someone asks
for a more "specific" handling, we do it..

Any specific-only solution will end in a bug-prone software, and you'll
get lots of bug reports for it everytime it is launched on a computer
with a different kind of storage... But having storage type specific
features is also desirable...

For the generalistc approach i would (personaly) use an exception
treatment... printing something to the console or having a GUI frontend
asking for the user to report that error.. or maybe even asking if the
user allows the software to send debbug info automaticaly trough the
user's internet connection (never do it without asking)..

What do you think about that?

Mario

Sivan Greenberg escreveu:
> Mario, currently I have only two options to fix this in mind:
>
> 1) Check for CDROMness, if not, assume everything is like Type == 'disk' , meaning, assuming everything else but CDROMs cannot be un-writeable
> 2) check for each and every drive_type be it zip, disk, cdrom etc.. I reckon there are not so much types and they get seldomly updated as they go by storage technology rather by branding.
>
> Any thoughts?
>
>