From:	invalid AT erehwon DOT invalid (Graaagh the Mighty)
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: Peculiar behavior of program.
Organization:	Low Charisma Anonymous
Message-ID:	<3b3b4948.212143163@news.primus.ca>
References:	<Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 1010626161231 DOT 17201D AT is>
X-Newsreader:	Forte Free Agent 1.11/32.235
Lines:	29
Date:	Thu, 28 Jun 2001 15:14:43 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host:	207.176.153.4
X-Complaints-To:	news AT primus DOT ca
X-Trace:	news1.tor.primus.ca 993741345 207.176.153.4 (Thu, 28 Jun 2001 11:15:45 EDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date:	Thu, 28 Jun 2001 11:15:45 EDT
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

On Tue, 26 Jun 2001 16:12:47 +0300 (IDT), Eli Zaretskii
<eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il> sat on a tribble, which squeaked:

>No.  The DPMI host always gets the first chance to look at any
>exceptional condition.

That makes it responsible for giving the best data it can in every
situation then.

>Any number of things.  It could simply load some value into SS in
>inline assembly.  Or call int86x with wrong arguments.  Or installe a
>real-mode callback with wrong parameters.

My code does nothing of the sort as written. If it does as generated,
then gcc's optimizer has a severe bug.

>I knew you won't want to understand.

I could care less either way. All I want is the damned traceback, or
other useful debugging information. All I want is that if I compile
and run protected-mode code, it might produce bogus output, and it
might even bomb with an application fault, but it won't reboot the
machine, hang the OS, or do anything else outside of its PM sandbox.
Is that really too much to ask? Sheesh.
-- 
Bill Gates: "No computer will ever need more than 640K of RAM." -- 1980
"There's nobody getting rich writing software that I know of." -- 1980
"This antitrust thing will blow over." -- 1998
Combine neo, an underscore, and one thousand sixty-one to make my hotmail addy.

- Raw text -