Re: VS2005, x86/x64 build questions
"Mark" <mmodrall@nospam.nospam> wrote in message
news:94DC786F-A362-41A9-ADBB-0F028EACE024@microsoft.com...
Hi Ben...
Thanks for answering...
No, it runs a different compiler (different directory). There should be
some options to control that but they won't appear in the list of
compiler
flags.
But how does it know what other compiler to run? I went looking through
the
project on both systems, and the only option I found was under Linker >
Advanced > Target Machine (which was MachineX64, not MachineIA64 on both
sides). There was nothing I could find in the C/C++ compiler section to
indicate which architecture it would target.
The dumpbin /headers on both x64 versions say x64 on them.
1) on both systems, the x64 .exe came out ~25% *smaller* than the x86
.exe.
I would have expected the reverse given the wider datapath/variable
sizes
between the architectures.
That's unusual, but for such a small project such a trend is meaningless.
Also, did you use the same optimizer settings.
Yep. When I add the x64 platform in Configuration Manager, it copies the
settings from Win32 by default.
I know my sample code is nothing, but I figured the same
instruction/datapath size difference would apply to all the basic exe
infrastructure code too. I guess it is just too small a sample size to be
interesting.
By the by, I just looked at the binaries for cmd.exe, and the x64 version
is
also about 25% smaller than the x86 one.
I note your use of MSVCR80D.dll. In debug mode, sizes are meaningless.
2) I can run the result of the x86 build from the 2003 x64 box on the
XP
x86
box, but I can't run either the x86 or x64 build product from the XP
x86
box
on the 2003 x64 box. On the 2003 box I get "The system cannot execute
the
specified program." for both .exes. Not sure why that would be
Not sure either. Is it not only a 64-bit processor but a 64-bit Windows
install? Try Dependency Walker, see what it says about the executable.
Maybe you built an IA64 executable instead of an x86_64.
The x64 box is 2003 "Standard x64 Edition", 8 procs (the device manager
says
Intel Xeon), 26 gig of ram.
I don't think Dependency Walker works very well in an x64 environment. I
don't think it understands x64 exes at all. It is in the Program Files
(x86)
directory, so I guess that explains it. For x64 exes it just says every
single dll is missing.
The odd part is that for the x86 builds, depends.exe says the one built on
the x64 box is fine, but it says the one actually built on an x86 box
can't
find MSVCR80D.dll. Both exes show it as a dependency, only in one case
depends says "Yep, found it. All's good" and in the other it says its
missing.
You need a newer Dependency Walker. http://www.dependencywalker.com/
3) When I do dumpbin /headers an all the exes in question, I see that
there's base addr differences between those built on the XP x86 box and
the
2003 x64 box, and there is also some difference of a small number of
bytes
in both the code and data sections. Could any of these explain why the
2003
x64 box won't run output produced from an XP x86 box?
Only things I can think of are:
(1) The exe is for Itanium.
or
(2) You didn't install the runtime libraries.
The other quirk in those theories is that the x64 box won't run the x86
build from an x86 machine either (though the x86 box will run the x86
build
from the x64 box).
I didn't initially realize you had Visual Studio installed on the Win2003
box. Do both copies of VS2005 have SP1 applied? It sounds very much like a
wrong version of the runtime libraries.
Thanks
Mark