From cce8f6a48de5ad77f0b6ae368e11239c558fea84 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Jeff Parsons Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2017 13:30:19 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] Added dBASE III copy-protection notes --- _posts/2017-08-11-dbase-iii-copy-protection-revisited.md | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/_posts/2017-08-11-dbase-iii-copy-protection-revisited.md b/_posts/2017-08-11-dbase-iii-copy-protection-revisited.md index 614d74e9b..90df48017 100644 --- a/_posts/2017-08-11-dbase-iii-copy-protection-revisited.md +++ b/_posts/2017-08-11-dbase-iii-copy-protection-revisited.md @@ -22,7 +22,7 @@ Perhaps my thinking was that, after all, it's just software, so how hard could i the challenge very seriously, because I also made a lot of notes. I recently found [those notes](/docs/personal/#dbase-iii-copy-protection), along with copies of the -[dBASE III disks](/disks/pcx86/apps/other/dbase3/1.0/) used. Unfortunately, all they contained was my *patched* +[dBASE III disks](/disks/pcx86/apps/other/dbase3/1.0/) used. Unfortunately, all the disks contained was my *patched* (unlocked) version of `DBASE.EXE`, and for the sake of a complete archive, I wanted the *unpatched* (locked) version as well. Fortunately, my patching notes also show all the original bytes, so I reproduced the original file by reversing the patching process, using PCjs: