Jump to content

Welcome to MSFN Forum
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. This message will be removed once you have signed in.
Login to Account Create an Account



Photo

Visual Studio 2008 and Windows 9x

- - - - -

  • Please log in to reply
34 replies to this topic

#26
mikesw

mikesw

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 365 posts
  • Joined 05-October 05
RetroOS: From the link you provided about kernel32.dll,

Is there a work-around?

Yes. My preferred workaround is the Legacy Extender library which you can link to and it will include the required functions to make the code work on Windows 9x/Me/NT4:

Legacy Extender for Visual Studio 2005/2008 (www.legacyextender.com)

You can build with Visual Studio 2008 (SP1 too) and the project will then run fine even on a vanilla Windows 95 box.

Legacy Extender is not a quick patch, it is a supported and tested solution. It is compatible with code optimization, and it recalculates the checksum when you edit the post-build version.

(Conflict of interest: I was involved in testing Legacy Extender!)

NOTE: Per the previous sentence, I just copied it here, I wasn't involved in the testing. It was the person who posted
this comment.


On a similar issue for kernel32.dll errors being generated when I try to install googletoolbar v4.0.1602.1060 IE beta
on a Win 2k Pro SP4 system. I get this error which prevents it being installed.

The procedure entry point WTSGetActiveConsoleSessionId could not be found in the dynamic link library
Kernel32.dll.


And also this one.

GoogleUpdater could not load the file ci.dll. Please reinstall GoogleUpdater to fix this issue.

Of course I'm trying to reinstall it which I can't due to these errors.



So, is my problem above due to Visual Studio 2008 not supporting Win 2K anymore? If so, then
the Google Toolbar people must being using VS 2008 although they say the toolbar can be installed
on a win 2K machine. :(

Edited by mikesw, 04 September 2008 - 08:30 AM.



How to remove advertisement from MSFN

#27
Tihiy

Tihiy

    the creator

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,944 posts
  • Joined 19-November 04
  • OS:Windows 7 x64
  • Country: Country Flag

Donator

You can build with Visual Studio 2008 (SP1 too) and the project will then run fine even on a vanilla Windows 95 box.

God ****. Show me who wrote that, i'll burn them with fire.

#28
mikesw

mikesw

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 365 posts
  • Joined 05-October 05

You can build with Visual Studio 2008 (SP1 too) and the project will then run fine even on a vanilla Windows 95 box.

God ****. Show me who wrote that, i'll burn them with fire.

http://forums.msdn.m...4-f1a40e8a3bb3/

Go to user 'mcb' dated Aug 25,2008. It currently is the last post here.

Let the flames start burning. :whistle:

I think he meant with www.legacyextender.com software

Edited by mikesw, 04 September 2008 - 09:46 AM.


#29
Drugwash

Drugwash

    MSFN Expert

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,290 posts
  • Joined 21-June 06
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag
I believe the traffic is now restricted to Russian-only domains. :(
Could you please use a non-restrictive host, such as uploaded.to, rapidshare.com or similar?

На данный момент иностранный трафик у этого файла превышает российский.



#30
Advanced User

Advanced User

    Newbie

  • Member
  • 12 posts
  • Joined 16-April 07
  • OS:Windows 2000 Professional
  • Country: Country Flag

Could you please use a non-restrictive host, such as uploaded.to, rapidshare.com or similar?

Dаmn, I have only now found out that Rapidshare has Collector's Zone service with downloads control ability. :blushing: Then forget for instructions which i gave above, here are new rapidshare links: 2008 - 7.0 - 7.1 - 7.x

Edited by Advanced User, 02 August 2009 - 02:53 PM.


#31
Drugwash

Drugwash

    MSFN Expert

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,290 posts
  • Joined 21-June 06
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag
Thanks, found some interesting things there. ;)
I had already patched and repacked beta2 of VC2008 for Win9x use, last year in November but didn't mess with the msi within, which still holds a system32 folder (should be system for Win9x).
Also I'm not familiar with the [BlockProductCode] section in the original install.ini.
I see you completely overhauled the installation process; I tried a minimal-change approach. Might give it another try when I feel like.

#32
celeron64

celeron64
  • Member
  • 8 posts
  • Joined 10-September 08

While he/she sounds very confident in their approach, they seemed to have left out describing what if anything this will cost, and to whom?

Would something like $29.95 (individual developer license) be too much in your opinion? Some corporate developers might not even take it seriously at that price, while for others anything more than free would be too expensive. I exchanged ideas about the possible pricing. A small price would still give customers technical support and updates, i.e. if new functions emerge, they would likely be added to the library, etc.

Legacy Extender is not as vast as KernelEx. It focuses on what Visual Studio adds or breaks that the developer did not want in the first place. If the developer used some other XP-only functions on purpose, Legacy Extender will not help much. On the other hand, Legacy Extender is great if you already have a "legacy" project, and simply want to update the compiler, and you thought the only way was to run two different versions of Visual Studio.

I doubt that Microsoft would be interested (as a customer), because they have demonstrated that they do not care about legacy compatibility. To the contrary, it seemed to me that they introduced or at least supported incompatibility on purpose. Do you remember how Visual Studio 2005 became incompatible with Windows 95? At the time it did not really break much. It would not have taken more than a few hours of work for Microsoft to retain compatibility by just not using certain functions. Lots of programmers had proposed solutions, patches, etc. I proposed one to Microsoft myself after I filed a bug report (I thought it was a bug!), they filed the "bug" as something like "by design" and closed the case!

As for whether it works or not, it's currently being tested in public. Anyone can access it. You are free to decide for yourself, provide feedback, etc.

Just my two cents!

yes

#33
Advanced User

Advanced User

    Newbie

  • Member
  • 12 posts
  • Joined 16-April 07
  • OS:Windows 2000 Professional
  • Country: Country Flag
Visual C++ 7.x Packs were updated according to KB954885 and VS .NET 2002 SP1. List of updated files include:

ATL71A.DLL 7.10.3077.0 -> 7.10.6088.0
ATL71U.DLL 7.10.6041.0 -> 7.10.6088.0
MFC71.DLL 7.10.6041.0 -> 7.10.6088.0
MFC71CHS.DLL 7.10.6041.0 -> 7.10.6088.0
MFC71CHT.DLL 7.10.6041.0 -> 7.10.6088.0
MFC71DEU.DLL 7.10.6041.0 -> 7.10.6088.0
MFC71ENU.DLL 7.10.6041.0 -> 7.10.6088.0
MFC71ESP.DLL 7.10.6041.0 -> 7.10.6088.0
MFC71FRA.DLL 7.10.6041.0 -> 7.10.6088.0
MFC71ITA.DLL 7.10.6041.0 -> 7.10.6088.0
MFC71JPN.DLL 7.10.6041.0 -> 7.10.6088.0
MFC71KOR.DLL 7.10.6041.0 -> 7.10.6088.0
MFC71U.DLL 7.10.6041.0 -> 7.10.6088.0
MSVCI70.DLL 7.0.9466.0 -> 7.0.9955.0

Look for new links in previous posts (#23 and #30).

Edited by Advanced User, 17 November 2009 - 05:53 PM.


#34
Advanced User

Advanced User

    Newbie

  • Member
  • 12 posts
  • Joined 16-April 07
  • OS:Windows 2000 Professional
  • Country: Country Flag
Visual C++ 7.x Packs were updated according to KB971089. List of updated files include:

ATL71A.DLL 7.10.6088.0 -> 7.10.6101.0
ATL71U.DLL 7.10.6088.0 -> 7.10.6101.0
MFC71.DLL 7.10.6088.0 -> 7.10.6101.0
MFC71CHS.DLL 7.10.6088.0 -> 7.10.6101.0
MFC71CHT.DLL 7.10.6088.0 -> 7.10.6101.0
MFC71DEU.DLL 7.10.6088.0 -> 7.10.6101.0
MFC71ENU.DLL 7.10.6088.0 -> 7.10.6101.0
MFC71ESP.DLL 7.10.6088.0 -> 7.10.6101.0
MFC71FRA.DLL 7.10.6088.0 -> 7.10.6101.0
MFC71ITA.DLL 7.10.6088.0 -> 7.10.6101.0
MFC71JPN.DLL 7.10.6088.0 -> 7.10.6101.0
MFC71KOR.DLL 7.10.6088.0 -> 7.10.6101.0
MFC71U.DLL 7.10.6088.0 -> 7.10.6101.0

Look for new links in previous posts (#23 and #30).

Edited by Advanced User, 17 November 2009 - 05:54 PM.


#35
Offler

Offler

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 497 posts
  • Joined 29-October 06
few months ago i unpacked msvcr2008 with any extracting program (twice, or three times). later with Kernel EX 0.3.6 i executed the setup and copied the extracted files to system32 directory. After tests with some applications for visual studio 2008 i considered this manually installed package as fully working on windows 98 SE with newest KernelEX. i just had no time to make tutorial for this :D




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users