On Mon, 9 Jun 2003, Bart Oldeman wrote:

> On Mon, 9 Jun 2003, Daniel Greenberg wrote:
>
> > It turns out the divide-by-zero problem isn't "really new," just new.
> > That is, 1.1.4.15 has the problem, but 1.1.4.0 is fine.  I picked
> > something in the middle - 1.1.4.8 - and found that it too had the "new"
> > divide-by-zero errors.  A couple more downloads and compiles and I
> > was able to isolate the introduction of the problem to 1.1.4.7.  That is,
> > 1.1.4.6 runs without the "new" divide-by-zero errors, while
> > 1.1.4.7 runs with the errors.  So apparently 1.1.4.7 was the first to
> > introduce this problem.
>
> Thanks, that narrows it down a bit. I suspect that the initialization
> (which was shuffled around a little in 1.1.4.7) is the culprit, but I
> fail to see where.
>
> Can you make hexdumps of the area from 0:0 to 0:500 for both DOSEMU's
> (using DEBUG in DOS or using dosdebug with the "d" command) and see if
> there are any differences, beyond the timer (4 bytes at 0:46c) and the
> keyboard buffer (0:41a- - 0:43d)?
>
> Bart
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-msdos" in
> the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>

Comparing 1.1.4 & 1.1.5 the only difference I found was at 0:01C.  This is
in the interrupt vector table, no?  Not sure the significance of this
though. Otherwise - with the exception of the timer and keyboad buffer -
they are identical.

Dan

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-msdos" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to