RE: Windows 95 support ?

["Dave Korn" <dave dot korn at artimi dot com>]

On 25 April 2006 22:57, Samuel Thibault wrote:

> Dave Korn, le Tue 25 Apr 2006 22:43:43 +0100, a écrit :
>>   Sounds like the comctl32 theory would be the next one to test then.
> 
> It is installed, I don't know what is considered as version:
> 
> MajorOSystemVersion     1
> MinorOSystemVersion     0
> MajorImageVersion       0
> MinorImageVersion       0
> MajorSubsystemVersion   4
> MinorSubsystemVersion   0
> Win32Version            00000000
> 
> All the symbols needed by comctl32 are provided in dlls.


  You know, we may be barking up the wrong hippo here.  Perhaps it's now worth
installing IE4 on the recalcitrant machine and see if having the whole package
actually does make the difference or not; maybe there's *another* significant
difference between these machines that we haven't considered yet.  While
you're checking things, take a look at the tab of the Add/Remove software
control panel where it shows which windows components are installed: maybe
there's a difference there that matters.  I don't remember w95 all that well -
does it install winsock and tcp/ip by default, or was it an optional component
back then?


    cheers,
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/