Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm Sender: cygwin-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 12:20:12 -0800 From: Geoffrey Noer To: Jonathan Pryor Cc: Cygwin Mailing List Subject: Re: Compiled executable differences between 9x and NT Message-ID: <19990309122012.A7589@cygnus.com> References: <088201be696e$f2867650$e63d2509 AT jonpryor DOT raleigh DOT ibm DOT com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.1i In-Reply-To: <088201be696e$f2867650$e63d2509@jonpryor.raleigh.ibm.com>; from Jonathan Pryor on Mon, Mar 08, 1999 at 09:20:54AM -0500 On Mon, Mar 08, 1999, Jonathan Pryor wrote: > > What are the *exact* differences between 95 and NT, > as far as the cygwin environment and compiler are > concerned? > > I would normally assume that if I stick with the > strict ANSI stuff (console I/O), limited to the > extent so that MSVC can also compile it (no great > reliance on the posix api's), that I should be able > to compile an executable on both 95 and NT and have > it behave the same on both. 9x and NT have different sets of bugs and features. Cygwin checks which OS is running and uses this info to provide the a Unix layer that should make Cygwin applications run the same under either OS. (Of course while this is the goal, sometimes this doesn't quite happen). > Unfortunately, I have a program for which this isn't > happening. Under NT, it runs as expected in all > cases. Under 95, it's currently causing > a "blue screen" with cygwin egcs-1.1.1, and causes > a "This progam has performed an illegal operation > and will be shut down." message under mingw32. > > 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 > NT.) > > As a note, it compiles and runs fine with MSVC6. Ah, you're using mingw. So Cygwin is probably not relevant. Hmmm, well, I've noticed that Windows 9x often is more sensitive to buggy exes. Perhaps you're running into a compiler issue? -- Geoffrey Noer Email: noer AT cygnus DOT com Cygnus Solutions -- Want to unsubscribe from this list? Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com