This is the mail archive of the firstname.lastname@example.org
mailing list for the Cygwin project. See the Cygwin
home page for more information.
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Re: Compiled executable differences between 9x and NT
- To: "Jonathan Pryor" <email@example.com>
- Subject: Re: Compiled executable differences between 9x and NT
- From: Mumit Khan <firstname.lastname@example.org.EDU>
- Date: Tue, 09 Mar 1999 14:27:18 -0600
- cc: "Cygwin Mailing List" <email@example.com>
- Delivered-To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Delivered-To: mailing list email@example.com
- In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 08 Mar 1999 09:20:54 EST." <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Mailing-List: contact email@example.com; run by ezmlm
- Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org
"Jonathan Pryor" <email@example.com> writes:
> I get these errors if the executable was compiled
> and run under 95, or if the executable was compiled
> under NT but run under 95. (The same executable --
> compiled under either 95 or NT -- runs fine under
> As a note, it compiles and runs fine with MSVC6.
> Any thoughts as to what could be causing the problem?
> Is there anything that is known to break 95 while
> working under NT?
> - Jon
> (Yes, I probably should try to get the whole source
> available, but I'm in the process of trying to clean
> it up for public distribution, so it may be awhile...)
Without looking at your code, it's almost impossible to tell what is
wrong. Compiler bug? User code bug? Runtime bug? All of these are
probable, and that's why guesswork is usually a waste of time.
If you can package up the sources, I'll take a look.
Note that W95 is *very* sensitive to memory corruption bugs, and in
many cases, these codes will run seemingly fine on Linux, NT etc.
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to firstname.lastname@example.org