On Saturday 26 October 2002 17:36, John K. Hohm wrote: > > Tough all safedisc programs depend on this, I have decided not to make an > > official patch. The reason is that additional info is needed for a proper > > fix. Safedisc depends on that EXCEPTION_ACCESS_VIOLATION is returned on > > an int 0x01 call. But it should be checked what exceptions are raised on > > different windows versions when int 0x01 is called. And maybe the same > > should be done with other interrupts. > > It would be good if somebody could make that test program. Else I will > > keep the non proper fix. > > You may think me a rube, but I just made a test program that calls an
What do you mean by rube? According to my dictionary rube means: rube n.: AmE slang someone, usually from the country, who has no experience of other places and thinks in a simple way I dont understand while would you be a rube? > arbitrary interrupt and prints the exception information. I don't set up > any registers, so perhaps it generates an exception when it ought not in > some cases, but anyone else is free to improve it. Source and a > VC6-compiled MSVCRT-using version, along with results for all 255 > interrupts on Windows XP Professional, is here: > > http://petra.trnty.edu/~jhohm/intexcep.zip Thanks for your work. It proves my assumptions at least in the winXP case, and I assume it is the same in nt40. It would be nice if somebody could run this program on a win9x system. (I only have win2k available here). Thanks Zsolt