From: address@nospicedham.not.available   
      
   Terje,   
      
   > I thought that one was obvious [snip]   
      
   It is.   And in its simplicity its rather beautiful too.   Its only drawback   
   is that one extra stack it uses.   I was hoping for a solution which would   
   do away with it ... and still stay as simple ofcourse.   
      
   But I'm listening wit interest to the provided solutions, weighing each pros   
   and cons.   
      
   For instance, I like the runtime patching of all the involved INTs.  But I   
   have to figure out what the macro (to automatiaclly add each usage to a   
   list) will look like, and if I will be able to recognise what it does in a   
   year or so in the future.   
      
   But I will most likely implement the puhsing of the flags and indirectly far   
   call the vector too, if only to see what it looks like.   
      
   > I intended for this one to use a segment overrride   
      
   I figured as much.  I only wanted to show that I do pay attention here. :-)   
      
   > but safer if the code called this way assumes CLI while doing something   
   > dangerous like changing SS:SP.   
      
   Just this afternoon I was looking at what a SIS900 packetdriver is doing (it   
   or the chipset is giving me grief), which indeed switches to its own stack.   
   Only now I realize that it wraps stuff in CLI/STI commands, instead of   
   saving the current flags, doing a CLI and its business, and than restore   
   them (a bit hard when switching stacks though).   
      
   Regards,   
   Rudy Wieser   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)