software built and worked under wine but not in vista?
nerv at dawncrow.de
Fri May 21 12:56:28 CDT 2010
Am 21.05.2010 01:34, schrieb Hin-Tak Leung:
> --- On Thu, 20/5/10, Matijn Woudt <tijnema at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> * On Tue, 18 May 2010, Hin-Tak Leung wrote:
>>>>> So it seems that setupgs.exe is mis-compiled
>> under wine with win7 sdk but
>>>>> just happened to also work under wine. Any
>> idea how it might happen?
>>> I have gone ahead and done exactly that - the correct
>> behavior should be a
>>> msg box saying filelist.txt is missing, rather than
>> setupgs.exe not a valid
>>> win32 application.
>>> I haven't tried the uninstaller yet, so I don't know
>> if the wine-built
>>> uninstaller work:
>>> To analyse the executables are a bit beyond me, but I
>> hope somebody can do
>>> under either system, if I compile the file twice
>> quickly, the result differs
>>> only by the datestamp and checksum (and in two
>> wine-compiled executable
>>> built a bit of time between , also a few bytes in the
>> .text section after
>>> what looks like an import table in a hex editor?
>> There are a few differences I spotted between the two
>> 1) setupgs-wine.exe has wrong image size, changing it from
>> 0x2b200 to
>> 0x2b000 makes the executable working under win7.
>> 2) setupgs-wine.exe has wrong resource size, probably
>> related to 1),
>> because the size of both executables are the same.
>> 3) The assembly in setupgs-wine.exe has only LF line
>> endings, vista
>> has CRLF. This explains 2).
>> I don't know the reason for 3), I assume it's a bug
>> somewhere in wine.
> I tried uninstgs-wine.exe and it is also broken. What's more, the executable is of a different size. I am thinking 2 and 3 are probably red herrings, although it is curious how it happens. (I git-archive under unix and use winzip to extract them, so the manifests are the same, and have unix line endings.)
> The ghostscript distribution has other executables besides setupgs.exe and uninstgs.exe (for install and uninstall), but only those two seem to be broken. Those two are also different in having been manipulated through mt. Could the running of mt be buggy?
> mt -nologo -manifest $(PSSRC)dwsetup_x64.manifest -outputresource:$(SETUP_XE);#1
> I have tried re-running mt on either a built executable or vista-compiled ones, but there are no modification. perhaps I don't understand what it does and how it does its work.
compile your setupgs in wine but without the "mt-step" and try running it on vista.
if mt breaks the PE file then submit a bug report describing wrong behavior of mt.
Best Regards, André Hentschel
More information about the wine-devel