1. RE: Bug Report - Bernie's Win32Engine
cklester at yahoo.com wrote:
> Bernie,
>
> When running TBAR.EXW in Windows 2000... :)
>
> I get the following strange message box:
>
> Application Error: C:\EUPHORIA\BIN\EXW.EXE
>
> "The instruction at 00417608 referenced memory at 000000008
> The memory could not be written
>
The program functions with no problems in win95 sr2 and
and does not use any special features or tricks in Euphoria.
I do not have w2k to test it on.
I would suggest that you check that your version of w2k
is at the highest service level because there were many
patchs/fixs in w2k since its first release.
The highest service patch level that I know of was service
level six you should be using at least that or higher.
The service level is display when the your system is first
booted up on the blue screen at the top.
If you are not using the highest level you may run into
other problems other than Euphoria.
This also applies to users of NT.
Bernie
2. RE: Bug Report - Bernie's Win32Engine
cklester at yahoo.com wrote:
> I did run the program in Windows 95 and it worked fine. The one thing I
> noticed was that the big EUPHORIA image does not get displayed in the
> Win2K
> version. Maybe this is a clue!
>
ck
Try commenting out line 302 in tbar.exw
The PaintBmp() function and see if error goes away
Thanks
Bernie
Bernie
3. RE: Bug Report - Bernie's Win32Engine
Irv Mullins wrote:
> Since Mandrake was the first which recognized and
> worked with all my hardware, I have stuck with it.
Irv:
Did my eu_engin.e work on Mandrake.
Bernie
4. RE: Bug Report - Bernie's Win32Engine
- Posted by Henri.Goffin at sbs.be
Aug 07, 2001
OK, guys! That's all very well! But what has it got to do with the w32engin bug
reported by ck?
I've got exactly the same problem. Platform: NT4 wks SP6a.
Henri Goffin
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Irv Mullins [SMTP:irvm at ellijay.com]
> Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 2:35 PM
> To: EUforum
> Subject: Re: Bug Report - Bernie's Win32Engine
>
>
> On Friday 03 August 2001 22:13, euman at bellsouth.net wrote:
>
> > what is there besides Gnome and KDE?
> > that can be setup to suit your particular taste.
>
> Let's see ...
> Mandrake's graphical disk partitioning is both more flexible and easier to
> use than RedHat's.
> The Mandrake control center makes RedHat's configuration tools look
> amateurish.
> The Software Manager a nice, graphical interface to RPM, which I like
> better than RedHat's.
>
> > I currently use a modified firestarter thru ipchains that seems to
> > be ok at blocking most of the scans I get...it also allows you to
> > shutdown a port if its being scanned regular from any address.
> > firestarter is a medium-medium strength *FREE* firewall.
>
> Mandrake comes with firewall installed.
>
> > >even though it is
> > > based on RedHat.
> >
> > keyword based on RH........
>
> Cadillacs are based on Chevy's, arent' they?
>
> > >Its Software Manager is really slick.
> >
> > I use a text based install so I dont really know about this.
> >
> > > Since Mandrake was the first which recognized and
> > > worked with all my hardware, I have stuck with it.
> >
> > What hardware did RH not recognise?
>
> A built-in soundcard. Never worked with anything, except Mandrake.
>
> Regards,
> Irv
>
>
>
>
