[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference iosg::all-in-1_v30

Title:	OLD ALL-IN-1 (tm) Support Conference
Notice:	Closed - See Note 4331.l to move to IOSG::ALL-IN-1
Moderator:	IOSG::PYE

Created:	Thu Jan 30 1992
Last Modified:	Tue Jan 23 1996
Last Successful Update:	Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:	4343
Total number of notes:	18308

3466.0. "UDP and registerdump" by UTRTSC::SMEETS (Martin, CSC Office support (NL)) Thu Oct 28 1993 12:08

Hi,

Customer reported the following problem.

ALL-IN-1 V3.0-1 DUTCH

A user with NETMBX and TMPMBX VMS privileges and only XOWN ALL-IN-1 privilege
creates an UDP, called F17.UDP, which only contains ".{".

If this user executes this F17.UDP for example on the WP form the result is the
following stackdump%SYSTEM-F-ACCVIO, access violation, reason mask=00, virtual address=00000020,
PC
=000EDA07, PSL=03C00004

  Improperly handled condition, image exit forced.

        Signal arguments              Stack contents

        Number = 00000005                0034D328
        Name   = 0000000C                00000000
                 00000000                00000000
                 00000020                00000000
                 000EDA07                BE0E0000
                 03C00004                003170CE
                                         00020002
                                         020E0002
                                         00316F3C
                                         7FED1F94

        Register dump
        R0 = 00000000  R1 = 003170CD  R2 = 00000000  R3 = 7FED1F68
        R4 = 00000000  R5 = 00000000  R6 = 0034D2F0  R7 = 00158244
        R8 = 00000000  R9 = 0007435C  R10= 00074340  R11= 0015F290
        AP = 7FED1F10  FP = 7FED1ED0  SP = 7FED1F4C  PC = 000EDA07
        PSL= 03C00004

This behaviour is reproducable on site even with qualifier /nocust.

Any ideas ?,

Martin

T.R	Title	User	Personal Name	Date	Lines
3466.2	Not a statement, more an opinion	FORTY2::ASH	Mail Interchange Group, Reading	`Fri Oct 29 1993 09:26`	10
	I tried this on our (US) system, and it fails as described. But only if it's a UDP tied to the function key. When I tried it in a UDP called DUMP, the execution reported a syntax error. Given that the UDP is syntactically incorrect, (and wouldn't do much even if it wasn't!), I'd be surprised if IOSG could devote much time to this one. Is that the only way of provoking the problem? Is it preventing the customer from doing work? grahame
3466.3	Ok, I agree...	UTRTSC::SMEETS	Martin, CSC Office support (NL)	`Fri Oct 29 1993 11:27`	9
	Hi Grahame, That's my opion also, although it's kind of sloppy ! Maybe IOSG could try to solve this in a PFR Thanks for your feedback, Martin