From:	Martin Str|mberg <ams AT ludd DOT luth DOT se>
Message-Id:	<200012160139.CAA07364@father.ludd.luth.se>
Subject:	Re: (fwd) Re: Getting the Windows NT version from DOS
In-Reply-To:	<4098-Fri15Dec2000223441+0200-eliz@is.elta.co.il> from Eli Zaretskii at "Dec 15, 2000 10:34:43 pm"
To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Date:	Sat, 16 Dec 2000 02:39:45 +0100 (MET)
X-Mailer:	ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL54 (25)]
MIME-Version:	1.0
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

According to Eli Zaretskii:
> > Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2000 16:55:13 +0100 (MET)
> > From: Martin Stromberg <eplmst AT lu DOT erisoft DOT se>
> > Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.programmer
> > 
> > I saw this on comp.os.msdos.programmer. It's source code to get
> > WINDOZE version, apparantly making it possible to discern between NT
> > and 2000.
> > 
> > Can we use this?
> 
> If someone can make a DJGPP source out of this and get it to report NT
> and 2K, it would be a good beginning.
> 
> But as far as I could see, this code needs a DLL to get the info, yes?

That's what I make out of it, yes.

> And that DLL needs to be compiled with MSVC (or MinGW, I guess)?

Yeah, DJGPP isn't sufficient.

> That's a major obstacle, IMHO: we would like a stand-alone solution.

Yes, we'd like that. However isn't this better than nothing?

> Also, we still don't know what to do to fix the problems on W2K.
> Charles did some footwork (I can send the details on demand), but he
> didn't have enough time to pinpoint the problem.

Yes. I looked very briefly at the problem and gave up, partly due to
time limits and partly due to that I didn't get anywhere (I couldn't
make head or tail out of it, I think the expresion is).


Right,

						MartinS

- Raw text -