Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!rutgers!cbmvax!cbmehq!cbmger!peterk From: peterk@cbmger.UUCP (Peter Kittel GERMANY) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.programmer Subject: Re: Copper mystery Message-ID: <1031@cbmger.UUCP> Date: 2 Apr 91 09:29:07 GMT References: <1991Mar27.211732.2436@kth.se> <20197@cbmvax.commodore.com> Reply-To: peterk@cbmger.UUCP (Peter Kittel GERMANY) Organization: Commodore Bueromaschinen GmbH, West Germany Lines: 15 In article <20197@cbmvax.commodore.com> jesup@cbmvax.commodore.com (Randell Jesup) writes: > > Two things happen: if you Wait() while disabled, exec re-enables >interrupts for you. Second, Disable() is remembered as part of your task. >During task removal, exec re-enables interrupts, removes Forbid()s, etc >(since they're stored in the task structure, this is almost automatic). Ha! Still someone around who claims there is no resource tracking in Amiga OS??? Look: we have at least *some* of it! :-))) (Sorry, couldn't resist) -- Best regards, Dr. Peter Kittel // E-Mail to \\ Only my personal opinions... Commodore Frankfurt, Germany \X/ {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!cbmger!peterk