From: mert0407 AT sable DOT ox DOT ac DOT uk (George Foot) Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp Subject: Re: Win95 DPMI/CWSDPMI problems Date: 14 Jul 1997 22:26:36 GMT Organization: Oxford University, England Lines: 22 Message-ID: <5qe92s$lbb@news.ox.ac.uk> References: <5qe2tj$khu$1 AT news DOT utdallas DOT edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: sable.ox.ac.uk To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp Precedence: bulk David G Farrell (fdavid AT utdallas DOT edu) wrote: : with no problems. It seems as if the Win95 DPMI server is more lenient : on errant memory accesses than CWSDPMI. Is this true? Has anyone ever had a : similar problem? I thought my code was fairly debugged and well-working until : this. I've tried to get it to crash under Win95 but it won't, ironically. Is : there anything that a Win95 DOS box will let you get away with that : CWSDPMI won't? I believe Win95's DPMI server allows null-pointer dereferences while CWSDPMI's doesn't, but I could be wrong. It is probably an errant pointer, as you guessed. Have you tried symifying the crash information it gives? This will tell you what function caused the error, and if you included debugging information (pass -g to gcc) it will tell you the source filename and line number of the error. Look for pointers dereferenced there, and make sure their values are unquestionably correct, and in particular check they have been initialised. -- George Foot Merton College, Oxford