Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 alpha 4/15/85; site amdcad.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!amdcad!phil
From: phil@amdcad.UUCP (Phil Ngai)
Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards,net.micro.pc
Subject: Re: Xenix Shared Data Bugs (and friends)
Message-ID: <2026@amdcad.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 18-Jul-85 14:13:28 EDT
Article-I.D.: amdcad.2026
Posted: Thu Jul 18 14:13:28 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 20-Jul-85 06:46:04 EDT
References: <183@medstar.UUCP>
Reply-To: phil@amdcad.UUCP (Phil Ngai)
Distribution: net
Organization: AMD, Sunnyvale, California
Lines: 16
Xref: watmath net.unix-wizards:13898 net.micro.pc:4605

In article <183@medstar.UUCP> robin@medstar.UUCP (Robin Cutshaw) writes:
>
>As usual, this posting relates to IBM Xenix 1.0 for the PC/AT...
>
>On the previous posting reguarding the "Panic Kernel (easy to do)", IBM has
>really shown their colors.  The jist of the article was that if you call
>getcwd() between sdenter() and sdleave() you will get a kernel panic (if you
>have stdio.h included and a few other things).  IBM's official response to
>this is "SEE PAGE 2-194 of the Software Command Reference where it says 'system
>calls should be avoided between sdenter and sdleave calls'".  This is their
>only response!  So now everyone who doesn't read and follow the directions on
>page 2-194 will be able to easily panic and crash the Xenix kernel.

Why are you using sdenter if you haven't read the man page for it?
Or is reading two whole pages of documentation too much effort?
--