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
Message-Id: <199903092027.OAA24823@modi.xraylith.wisc.edu>
X-Authentication-Warning: modi.xraylith.wisc.edu: localhost.xraylith.wisc.edu [127.0.0.1] didn't use HELO protocol
To: "Jonathan Pryor" <jonpryor AT vt DOT edu>
cc: "Cygwin Mailing List" <cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>
Subject: Re: Compiled executable differences between 9x and NT 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 08 Mar 1999 09:20:54 EST."
             <088201be696e$f2867650$e63d2509 AT jonpryor DOT raleigh DOT ibm DOT com> 
Date: Tue, 09 Mar 1999 14:27:18 -0600
From: Mumit Khan <khan AT xraylith DOT wisc DOT EDU>

"Jonathan Pryor" <jonpryor AT vt DOT edu> 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
> NT.)
> 
> 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?
> 
> Thanks,
>  - 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.

Regards,
Mumit


--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com