>  No, I suspect it«s likely to be a different solution with the same
>effect.  The sending of a non-specific EOI to the secondary controller
>may cause it to clear and then re-assert its output IRQ before the
>primary is ready to see it (and this assuming the actual calling IRQ has
>in fact been cleared).
>
>  If however, the primary is cleared first, it is able to respond to the
>second call from the secondary and the subsequent interrupt will be
>honoured.

This makes sense, too.

So, to finalize things, when I get it working (drop-dead day is Tuesday)
I'll post the solution here.

Thanks for all the help, guys.

Andy

==================================================================
  Andy Kunz - Montana Design - http://www.users.fast.net/~montana
==================================================================