Cool, guess it's confirmed then.  :)

I'll leave it up on the web site,  Altium can pick up a copy....

And maybe Ian wants a copy to add to our PEDA user bug database?

---Phil

TK> WOW! No only does it crash it, it totally wipes out its process!!! I tried
TK> it on Windows2000 and there is no trace of the app when I lauch the lib
TK> inside your ddb!!!

TK> Submit it.

TK> Tony




>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Phillip Stevens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>> Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 4:08 PM
>> To: Protel EDA Forum
>> Subject: [PEDA] Re[2]: CLIENT99SE caused an invalid page fault in module
>> <unk nown> at 0000:01000001.
>>
>>
>>
>> I put a (Zipped) copy of the DDB/lib that seemed to be causing my
>> invalid page
>> fault problem with Client99SE up on my web space.
>>
>> Anyone who would like to be a 2nd source,  and confirm the problem?
>> You (and Altium,  if it verifies as a real problem) can find a copy
>> of it here:
>> http://home.capecod.net/~pstevens/Crashes_Client_Page_Fault.zip
>>
>> I get the problem as soon as it is added to the list of
>> libraries in use.
>> ---Phil
>>
>> BG> This is something which you may be able to e-mail the bad
>> library to Altium, & they should be able to fix, or patch Protel so that
>> BG> is will not bug like this again.  They probably will also be
>> able to repair the library, unless Altium has no interest in such
>> BG> uncovered bugs.
>>
>> BG> ____________
>> BG> Brian Guralnick
>>
>> BG> ----- Original Message -----
>> BG> From: "Ian Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> BG> To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> BG> Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2002 11:12 PM
>> BG> Subject: Re: [PEDA] CLIENT99SE caused an invalid page fault
>> in module <unk nown> at 0000:01000001.
>>
>>
>> BG> | At 10:39 PM 8/05/02 -0400, you wrote:
>> | >><..snip..>
>> | >>More concerned with:
>> | >>- How it came to be corrupted.
>> BG> |
>> BG> | Yep - that would be nice to know.
>> BG> |
>> | >>- That Client99SE allowed an (apparent) un-trapped error from a user
>> | >>library to get far enough to cause the program to be forcibly shut
>> | >>down by Windows.
>> | >>- That no indication of the problem area was given when the library
>> | >>was loaded.
>> BG> |
>> BG> | You mean check data on entry?  And report an error?  You
>> mean program
>> BG> | defensively? You mean validate data on file read? You mean
>> don't simply
>> BG> | believe that any file loaded is 100% OK?
>> BG> |
>> BG> | You know you may have an idea here.  Radical stuff. Maybe
>> you could patent
>> BG> | these concepts (after all some wanker has patented sitting
>> on a swing and
>> BG> | alternately pulling on the chains/ropes to swing sideways).
>> BG> |
>> BG> | Now, to make sure another of my satirical mails are not
>> misinterpreted the
>> BG> | above is a *joke*.  Protel have a less than ideal track
>> record in defensive
>> BG> | programming.  It is possible and desirable that *no* file
>> read should cause
>> BG> | a program crash - the file should be validated first.  This
>> is commonly
>> BG> | done with CRCs and is not rocket science.  Even without
>> CRCs out-of-ramge
>> BG> | data should be trapped and a useful error message reported
>> and then in the
>> BG> | case of a library, the library unloaded.
>> BG> |
>> BG> | I think crashes on reading corrupted data files are actually bugs.
>> BG> |
>> BG> | Ian
>>

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* To leave this list visit:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html
*
* Contact the list manager:
* mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* Forum Guidelines Rules:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/forumrules.html
*
* Browse or Search previous postings:
* http://www.mail-archive.com/proteledaforum@techservinc.com
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Reply via email to