On Tue, 09 Dec 2003 18:47:18 +0200, Shachar Shemesh wrote:
I'm not sure I'll manage to do that. The problem happens so rarely, and I'm working on other problems in the program, that I'm not sure the added output is something I can do that over time. Not to mention that when I exit the program with these settings, I get a long loop of: 0009:trace:seh:EXC_CallHandler calling handler at 0x66e5d029 code=c0000005 flags=10
Well c000005 is "access violation" iirc, so this is definately not normal behaviour :)
I'm not sure what seh does, but it's triggering other problems as well.
It just turns on exception tracing (seh == structured exception handling)
I don't know of other causes for problems that only happen OCCASIONALLY. Yes, it's a race.
Hehe, sorry :) Qualifying everything with a "maybe" is a bad habit of mine.
How can I attach to two threads?
You don't, you attach to a process then pass the thread id to the "bt" command, ie:
attach 0x0e (process id) bt 0x9 bt 0x1 ... etc ....
Wouldn't that cause it to bomb each and every time? Like I said before - usually it works fine.
Yes, true.
This program sets up tons of error handlers. Usually, however, they just bring up a dialog that says "this program has crashed. Do you want us to rerun it for you?". Another fine Microsoft invention.
Hmm, beats simply writing "Segmentation fault" into the ether, which is the default linux behaviour when run from a gui :)
thanks -mike