| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 2968.1 | | DECWET::VOBA | | Tue May 14 1996 14:27 | 3 |
| 2968.2 | | CRONIC::LEMONS | And we thank you for your support. | Fri Feb 21 1997 10:03 | 8 |
| Hi
Is it possibel to build a SETUP.EXE that will execute on both Intel
and Alpha? If so, how?
Thanks!
tl
|
| 2968.3 | | BHAJEE::JAERVINEN | Ora, the Old Rural Amateur | Fri Feb 21 1997 10:41 | 3 |
| You could try to create a setup.bat (I think I've seen some) that first
checks the machine type and then starts the right thing.
|
| 2968.4 | WIN16 image | CANDOO::GRIEB | | Fri Feb 21 1997 11:28 | 9 |
|
Another common way to do this is have the SETUP.EXE be a WIN16 (or
DOS) image. It then figures out the arch and executes SETUP_AXP or
SETUP_X86.EXE.
as mentioned in .-1, .bat files work if you test environment variables
but don't provide as much control/ability to check.
|
| 2968.5 | | CRONIC::LEMONS | And we thank you for your support. | Fri Feb 21 1997 11:33 | 10 |
| Thanks for the suggestion. Yep, I'll probably do that. Over in the
eXcursion notes file, I'm having a discussion about the eXcursion
SETUP.EXE program, which runs (the exact same image, now) on both Intel
and Alpha. Someone responded with the insight that this image is a 286
16-bit image, and that's why it can run on both hardware architectures.
Comments on this?
Thanks!
tl
|
| 2968.6 | | LJSRV1::GULDENSCHUH | | Sat Feb 22 1997 00:23 | 13 |
| > Thanks for the suggestion. Yep, I'll probably do that. Over in the
> eXcursion notes file, I'm having a discussion about the eXcursion
> SETUP.EXE program, which runs (the exact same image, now) on both Intel
> and Alpha. Someone responded with the insight that this image is a 286
> 16-bit image, and that's why it can run on both hardware architectures.
It's definitely a 16-bit image. I don't really remember if it was a 286
or a 386 image. It goes thru an incredibly arcane series of checks to
figure out what software and hardware platform it's running on, and then
fires off the appropriate image from one of the platform sub-directories.
/s/ Chuck
|
| 2968.7 | 16bit 286 makes sense (pre V4) | BBPBV1::WALLACE | john wallace @ bbp. +44 860 675093 | Sat Feb 22 1997 08:10 | 4 |
| Prior to V4 there's no 386/486 support in the x86 emulator within
NT/RISC, so a "compatible executable" had to be a 16bit one AND
compiled for a 286. NT V4 provided the 386 support. Do you need to run
on 3.x?
|
| 2968.8 | | CRONIC::LEMONS | And we thank you for your support. | Mon Feb 24 1997 10:59 | 14 |
| "Do you need to run on 3.x?"
Yes, and Windows 95 soon, as well. So, is there a standard SETUP.EXE
that performs these platform checks, that I could just take an use, or
do I have to create this from scratch? Also, I'm looking for something
that I can give to another company for free. I'm deploying a tool that
doesn't have an installation procedure. I'd like to write this
procedure, then give the whole wad to the tool developer, hoping he'll
support it in the future.
Thoughts?
Thanks!
tl
|