1. Win32Lib 59.1 on win95
- Posted by akusaya at gmx.net
Dec 19, 2003
I tried to run an win32lib application on win95, but I got an error
498: Common controls could not be initialized!
Can't win32lib be used in win95, or my win95 installation failed, or I
missed a file?
Thanks.
2. Re: Win32Lib 59.1 on win95
----- Original Message -----
From: "aku saya" <akusaya at gmx.net>
To: <EUforum at topica.com>
Subject: Win32Lib 59.1 on win95
>
>
> I tried to run an win32lib application on win95, but I got an error
> 498: Common controls could not be initialized!
>
> Can't win32lib be used in win95, or my win95 installation failed, or I
> missed a file?
>
Current version of win32lib can not run on win95 systems and I have no plans to
change that.
Its a bit of work and only applies to 3 or 4 people in the world. 
I suggest
is time to upgrade to win98SE at least.
--
Derek
3. Re: Win32Lib 59.1 on win95
On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 19:13:28 +1100, Derek Parnell
<ddparnell at bigpond.com> wrote:
>From: "aku saya" <akusaya at gmx.net>
>> I tried to run an win32lib application on win95, but I got an error
>> 498: Common controls could not be initialized!
>>
>> Can't win32lib be used in win95, or my win95 installation failed, or I
>> missed a file?
>
>Current version of win32lib can not run on win95 systems and I have no plans to
>change that.
>
I'm not disagreeing with that... If you use an old version of windows,
you should be using an ancient version of win32lib
Aku, since I don't know whether upgrading the OS is a viable option
for you or not, Elliot posted a patch which may help, if you can't:
>Replace the line:
> lFlags = getWindowInfo(id, {WINDOWINFO_Style})
> if and_bits(lFlags[1], LBS_MULTIPLESEL) != 0 then
>with:
> lFlags = w32Func(xGetWindowLong, {getHandle(id), -16})
> if and_bits(lFlags, LBS_MULTIPLESEL) != 0 then
>and change lFlags to an atom instead of a sequence.
>Now, no need to upgrade from Windows 95 (unless you want to.)
Just to be clear on this: There is no point whatsoever making the
above changes to the official win32lib; a) slow everyone else down,
b) other win95 incompatible code will get added to win32lib every
release. c) fancy stuff like flat toolbars wont work on 95 period.
The other suggestion from the mailing list archives is to get a newer
version of comctl32.dll, though you may want to put it in your
application directory rather than C:windows/system otherwise your pc
might stop booting.
HTH,
4. Re: Win32Lib 59.1 on win95
On 19 Dec 2003, at 19:13, Derek Parnell wrote:
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "aku saya" <akusaya at gmx.net>
> To: <EUforum at topica.com>
> Subject: Win32Lib 59.1 on win95
>
>
> > I tried to run an win32lib application on win95, but I got an error
> > 498: Common controls could not be initialized!
> >
> > Can't win32lib be used in win95, or my win95 installation failed, or I
> > missed a file?
> >
>
> Current version of win32lib can not run on win95 systems and I have no plans
> to
> change that.
>
> Its a bit of work and only applies to 3 or 4 people in the world. I
> suggest
> is time to upgrade to win98SE at least.
/me respectfully disagrees.
Kat
5. Re: Win32Lib 59.1 on win95
On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 10:06:51 -0600, Kat <gertie at visionsix.com> wrote:
>On 19 Dec 2003, at 19:13, Derek Parnell wrote:
>> Current version of win32lib can not run on win95 systems and I have no plans
>> to
>> change that.
>>
>> Its a bit of work and only applies to 3 or 4 people in the world. I
>> suggest
>> is time to upgrade to win98SE at least.
>
>/me respectfully disagrees.
>
>Kat
Sounds to me like Kat just volunteered herself an important position
as 'keeper of win32lib for win95'. A grand title for a fairly trivial
task: apply the mods suggested to a particular version of win32lib,
test with/without various versions of comctl32.dll (or at least just
document versions known to work), and host that little bundle with
notes such as "does not support flat toolbar" (my apologies if that is
untrue, I don't have win95 installed here), and most importantly "if
something does not work, and you can't be bothered to code round it,
then install win98 or later and use the latest version of win32lib."
Re-apply/test/Upload to web page new versions as and when you see fit.
The messages that aku/Derek are proposing could then point to Kat's
page.
Regards,
Pete
http://palacebuilders.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/euphoria.html
6. Re: Win32Lib 59.1 on win95
On 20 Dec 2003, at 0:20, Pete Lomax wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 10:06:51 -0600, Kat <gertie at visionsix.com> wrote:
>
> >On 19 Dec 2003, at 19:13, Derek Parnell wrote:
> >> Current version of win32lib can not run on win95 systems and I have no
> >> plans
> >> to change that.
> >>
> >> Its a bit of work and only applies to 3 or 4 people in the world. I
> >> suggest is time to upgrade to win98SE at least.
> >
> >/me respectfully disagrees.
> >
> >Kat
> Sounds to me like Kat just volunteered herself an important position
Didn't sound like that to me. It was just coincidental that i had posted a bit
of
news about 40% (?) of existing computers in the the list of companies
sampled, still run win95 and have no plans to downgrade them to win98, 2k,
mp, or xp. Derek said 3 or 4 people, it's more than that, i believe.
If people use a win32lib that i cannot use, i simply won't use their lib. Same
goes for javascript, java, activex, vb, vbs, etc.
Sounds like it was indeed a mistake you made to email me about Eu on
Parrot? Think i am not doing anything? I am doing those things i want to do,
things that no one else is interested in. Like learning other computer
languages to make that http proxy i still don't have and still need.
Kat
> as 'keeper of win32lib for win95'. A grand title for a fairly trivial
> task: apply the mods suggested to a particular version of win32lib,
> test with/without various versions of comctl32.dll (or at least just
> document versions known to work), and host that little bundle with
> notes such as "does not support flat toolbar" (my apologies if that is
> untrue, I don't have win95 installed here), and most importantly "if
> something does not work, and you can't be bothered to code round it,
> then install win98 or later and use the latest version of win32lib."
>
> Re-apply/test/Upload to web page new versions as and when you see fit.
>
> The messages that aku/Derek are proposing could then point to Kat's
> page.
>
> Regards,
> Pete
> http://palacebuilders.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/euphoria.html
>
>
>
> TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE!
>
>
7. Re: Win32Lib 59.1 on win95
On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 21:19:19 -0600, Kat <gertie at visionsix.com> wrote:
>On 20 Dec 2003, at 0:20, Pete Lomax wrote:
>> Sounds to me like Kat just volunteered herself an important position
>
>Didn't sound like that to me.
My apologies. It was meant tongue in cheek, obviously didn't come
across that way.
>Like learning other computer
>languages to make that http proxy i still don't have and still need.
I expect you've already looked here:
http://search.cpan.org/search?query=proxy&mode=all
Just a thought,
Pete
http://palacebuilders.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/euphoria.html
8. Re: Win32Lib 59.1 on win95
On 20 Dec 2003, at 12:05, Pete Lomax wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 21:19:19 -0600, Kat <gertie at visionsix.com> wrote:
>
> >On 20 Dec 2003, at 0:20, Pete Lomax wrote:
> >> Sounds to me like Kat just volunteered herself an important position
> >
> >Didn't sound like that to me.
> My apologies. It was meant tongue in cheek, obviously didn't come
> across that way.
Errrr,, ummmm,, my oops. I thought we were off on the wrong paw again,
sorry.
> >Like learning other computer
> >languages to make that http proxy i still don't have and still need.
> I expect you've already looked here:
> http://search.cpan.org/search?query=proxy&mode=all
Thanks!
Hey robs, did you see that url?
Kat
