rfarris@serene.CTS.COM (Rick Farris) (10/04/88)
This is a question about interfacing to Novell 2.11 SFT from Microsoft C.
After having problems with more complicated functions, I decided to try
a very simple function call. This one is function # DBh (219), which is
supposed to return the number of local disks in the AL. Here's the code,
which causes my computer to die.
#include <dos.h>
union REGS inreg;
main()
{
inreg.h.al = 0xdb;
intdos(&inreg, &inreg);
printf("al = %d\n", inreg.h.al);
}
Pretty simple, eh? How come it doesn't work? The computer locks up in the
middle of the intdos call...
Rick Farris rfarris@serene.cts.com voice (619) 259-6793
POB M KCBIW public access 259-7757
Del Mar CA 92014 ...!uunet!serene!rfarris serene.uucp 259-3704kory@avatar.UUCP (Kory Hamzeh) (10/07/88)
In article <267@serene.CTS.COM>, rfarris@serene.CTS.COM (Rick Farris) writes: > inreg.h.al = 0xdb; Shouldn't the function value 0xdb be put in the ah register as opposed to the al register? Thats the way dos works. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Kory Hamzeh UUCP: ..!uunet!psivax!quad1!avatar!kory INTERNET: avatar!kory@quad.com
brown@hpccc.HP.COM (Jeffrey L. Brown) (10/11/88)
/ hpccc:comp.dcom.lans / kory@avatar.UUCP (Kory Hamzeh) / 5:18 pm Oct 6, 1988 / In article <267@serene.CTS.COM>, rfarris@serene.CTS.COM (Rick Farris) writes: > inreg.h.al = 0xdb; >Shouldn't the function value 0xdb be put in the ah register as opposed to the >al register? Thats the way dos works. > > > >-- >------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >Kory Hamzeh UUCP: ..!uunet!psivax!quad1!avatar!kory > INTERNET: avatar!kory@quad.com It's been a few months since I last wrote Microsoft C Code for Netware. Where I worked we were using V2.10. Every Netware call I ever saw used the AH register for passing the function code. Considering that Novell seems to develop a new way to use functions at every release, this little bit of commonality (sp?) was amazing. Since changing registers for the function call would more than likely break a lot of software, I'm willing to bet, though, that inreg.h.al should be inreg.h.ah. Now the big question: are you sure that 0xdb is a function code and not a "sub-function selector"? A lot of the older (ie., non-packet) calls used al to specify a "sub-function" (I guess that's as good a name as any; I don't know what it's actually called....) Like I said, I used to write netware code with Microsoft C V5.0, but I haven't done so in 2 months (new job), and I don't know how much the API in 2.11 (or 2.15) has changed. Take all this with a beach (lots of grains :-) ) of salt. Jeff Brown brown%hpccc@hplabs.hp.com ...hplabs!hpccc!brown