Is there any way to get the extensions to install with the amd64 windbg install? The installer claims to install the extensions for 2000 as it is an option when doing custom installs, but it does not. Specifically, there should be a w2kfre and w2kchk directory created in the Debugging Tools for Windows folder, but they are not created when using the amd64 installer. If they aren’t supported, there shouldn’t be the option when installing and should be documented somewhere. Thanks!
Well, if you can find the extensions in the installation package (that is,
if they’re not part of some cab or whatever), you can just copy them to
wherever you want, make sure that your search path can find them (.extpath)
and you should be good to go.
Good luck,
mm
-----Original Message-----
From: xxxxx@lists.osr.com
[mailto:xxxxx@lists.osr.com] On Behalf Of xxxxx@ngc.com
Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2010 4:08 PM
To: Kernel Debugging Interest List
Subject: [windbg] Debugging Windows 2000 with x64 Debugger
Is there any way to get the extensions to install with the amd64 windbg
install? The installer claims to install the extensions for 2000 as it is an
option when doing custom installs, but it does not. Specifically, there
should be a w2kfre and w2kchk directory created in the Debugging Tools for
Windows folder, but they are not created when using the amd64 installer. If
they aren’t supported, there shouldn’t be the option when installing and
should be documented somewhere. Thanks!
WINDBG is sponsored by OSR
For our schedule of WDF, WDM, debugging and other seminars visit:
http://www.osr.com/seminars
To unsubscribe, visit the List Server section of OSR Online at
http://www.osronline.com/page.cfm?name=ListServer
You’re right, they’re installed with the x86 package but not the x64 package
(hadn’t noticed until I saw this post). Any reason why you can’t use the
32bit version of the debugger?
-scott
–
Scott Noone
Consulting Associate
OSR Open Systems Resources, Inc.
http://www.osronline.com
wrote in message news:xxxxx@windbg…
> Is there any way to get the extensions to install with the amd64 windbg
> install? The installer claims to install the extensions for 2000 as it is
> an option when doing custom installs, but it does not. Specifically, there
> should be a w2kfre and w2kchk directory created in the Debugging Tools for
> Windows folder, but they are not created when using the amd64 installer.
> If they aren’t supported, there shouldn’t be the option when installing
> and should be documented somewhere. Thanks!
>
No reason I can’t use the 32bit one, that’s what I’m doing. It just annoyed me more than anything else.
You can mail the debugger team at windbgfb at microsoft dot com and let them
know so that future people will avoid the annoyance (they’re responsive at
the alias). I suspect that it will lead to a fix in the documentation, the
Win2K extensions are fairly crufty at this point.
-scott
–
Scott Noone
Consulting Associate
OSR Open Systems Resources, Inc.
http://www.osronline.com
wrote in message news:xxxxx@windbg…
> No reason I can’t use the 32bit one, that’s what I’m doing. It just
> annoyed me more than anything else.
>
Yes, this would turn into a doc/installer change I’m afraid. Many of the Windows 2000-era KD extensions predate using debug symbols to abstract them from the target’s structure layouts (because there were no type-added public pdbs before winxp).
You’ll want to install the 32-bit package as Scott suggested if you need to use the win2k extensions. (I personally always install both the 32-bit and 64-bit package whenever I install the debuggers.)
- S [Msft]
-----Original Message-----
From: xxxxx@lists.osr.com [mailto:xxxxx@lists.osr.com] On Behalf Of Scott Noone
Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2010 1:53 PM
To: Kernel Debugging Interest List
Subject: Re:[windbg] Debugging Windows 2000 with x64 Debugger
You can mail the debugger team at windbgfb at microsoft dot com and let them know so that future people will avoid the annoyance (they’re responsive at the alias). I suspect that it will lead to a fix in the documentation, the Win2K extensions are fairly crufty at this point.
-scott
–
Scott Noone
Consulting Associate
OSR Open Systems Resources, Inc.
http://www.osronline.com
wrote in message news:xxxxx@windbg…
> No reason I can’t use the 32bit one, that’s what I’m doing. It just
> annoyed me more than anything else.
>
—
WINDBG is sponsored by OSR
For our schedule of WDF, WDM, debugging and other seminars visit:
http://www.osr.com/seminars
To unsubscribe, visit the List Server section of OSR Online at http://www.osronline.com/page.cfm?name=ListServer
Hello.
The reason why the Windows 2000 extensions are not installed in X64 packages
is because the source to those extensions is not available and all we have
are the X86 bits that were built back when Windows 2000 was the OS du jour.
I am not sure why the X64 installer does not indicate this. It could be
that the the installer technology does not do a good job of supporting
differing packages, or just as likely a human resource issue - I.E. not
enough time to generate a separate package with different interface. I
don’t honestly know.
.pat styles [microsoft]
“Scott Noone” wrote in message news:xxxxx@windbg…
You’re right, they’re installed with the x86 package but not the x64 package
(hadn’t noticed until I saw this post). Any reason why you can’t use the
32bit version of the debugger?
-scott
–
Scott Noone
Consulting Associate
OSR Open Systems Resources, Inc.
http://www.osronline.com
wrote in message news:xxxxx@windbg…
> Is there any way to get the extensions to install with the amd64 windbg
> install? The installer claims to install the extensions for 2000 as it is
> an option when doing custom installs, but it does not. Specifically, there
> should be a w2kfre and w2kchk directory created in the Debugging Tools for
> Windows folder, but they are not created when using the amd64 installer.
> If they aren’t supported, there shouldn’t be the option when installing
> and should be documented somewhere. Thanks!
>
Even if we had the source (and I can show you where it is, Pat) it wouldn’t
help. With Win2K and earlier, the extensions didn’t look at structures from
the symbols. They just hard-compiled in the headers for the structures. So
you couldn’t cross-debug with the extensions. So 64-bit extensions would
have the wrong pointer size when debugging 32-bit stuff, along with some
other mismatches.
–
Jake Oshins
Hyper-V I/O Architect
Windows Kernel Group
This post implies no warranties and confers no rights.
“pat styles [microsoft]” wrote in message
news:xxxxx@windbg…
> Hello.
>
> The reason why the Windows 2000 extensions are not installed in X64
> packages
> is because the source to those extensions is not available and all we have
> are the X86 bits that were built back when Windows 2000 was the OS du
> jour.
> I am not sure why the X64 installer does not indicate this. It could be
> that the the installer technology does not do a good job of supporting
> differing packages, or just as likely a human resource issue - I.E. not
> enough time to generate a separate package with different interface. I
> don’t honestly know.
>
> .pat styles [microsoft]
>
> “Scott Noone” wrote in message news:xxxxx@windbg…
>
> You’re right, they’re installed with the x86 package but not the x64
> package
> (hadn’t noticed until I saw this post). Any reason why you can’t use the
> 32bit version of the debugger?
>
> -scott
>
> –
> Scott Noone
> Consulting Associate
> OSR Open Systems Resources, Inc.
> http://www.osronline.com
>
>
> wrote in message news:xxxxx@windbg…
>> Is there any way to get the extensions to install with the amd64 windbg
>> install? The installer claims to install the extensions for 2000 as it is
>> an option when doing custom installs, but it does not. Specifically,
>> there
>> should be a w2kfre and w2kchk directory created in the Debugging Tools
>> for
>> Windows folder, but they are not created when using the amd64 installer.
>> If they aren’t supported, there shouldn’t be the option when installing
>> and should be documented somewhere. Thanks!
>>
>
True that. I was oversimplifying. I spend years trying to encourage people
to port their code of over to symbols-enabled stuff . I sure wouldn’t want
to go back if I had to actually support it. 
.pat styles [microsoft]
“Jake Oshins” wrote in message news:xxxxx@windbg…
Even if we had the source (and I can show you where it is, Pat) it wouldn’t
help. With Win2K and earlier, the extensions didn’t look at structures from
the symbols. They just hard-compiled in the headers for the structures. So
you couldn’t cross-debug with the extensions. So 64-bit extensions would
have the wrong pointer size when debugging 32-bit stuff, along with some
other mismatches.
–
Jake Oshins
Hyper-V I/O Architect
Windows Kernel Group
This post implies no warranties and confers no rights.
“pat styles [microsoft]” wrote in message
news:xxxxx@windbg…
> Hello.
>
> The reason why the Windows 2000 extensions are not installed in X64
> packages
> is because the source to those extensions is not available and all we have
> are the X86 bits that were built back when Windows 2000 was the OS du
> jour.
> I am not sure why the X64 installer does not indicate this. It could be
> that the the installer technology does not do a good job of supporting
> differing packages, or just as likely a human resource issue - I.E. not
> enough time to generate a separate package with different interface. I
> don’t honestly know.
>
> .pat styles [microsoft]
>
> “Scott Noone” wrote in message news:xxxxx@windbg…
>
> You’re right, they’re installed with the x86 package but not the x64
> package
> (hadn’t noticed until I saw this post). Any reason why you can’t use the
> 32bit version of the debugger?
>
> -scott
>
> –
> Scott Noone
> Consulting Associate
> OSR Open Systems Resources, Inc.
> http://www.osronline.com
>
>
> wrote in message news:xxxxx@windbg…
>> Is there any way to get the extensions to install with the amd64 windbg
>> install? The installer claims to install the extensions for 2000 as it is
>> an option when doing custom installs, but it does not. Specifically,
>> there
>> should be a w2kfre and w2kchk directory created in the Debugging Tools
>> for
>> Windows folder, but they are not created when using the amd64 installer.
>> If they aren’t supported, there shouldn’t be the option when installing
>> and should be documented somewhere. Thanks!
>>
>
Jake Oshins wrote:
Even if we had the source (and I can show you where it is, Pat)
Huh? Is it in an urn, or something?
(Sorry, I just got curious by this statement… possibly there is a
lesson here for me to learn about how not to lose something.)
Any hint or pointer appreciated… Thanks!
> Any hint or pointer appreciated… Thanks!
I think that the hint is that both Pat and Jake work for Microsoft.
It wouldn’t suprise me if tracking what must be the hundreds of millions of
lines of code which Microsoft has used in products, over very many years,
probably just as many reorganizations, and quite probably a few changes of
tools, is not as simple as one might hope.
That sounds about right…
mm
-----Original Message-----
From: xxxxx@lists.osr.com
[mailto:xxxxx@lists.osr.com] On Behalf Of Rod Widdowson
Sent: Monday, August 23, 2010 9:49 AM
To: Kernel Debugging Interest List
Subject: Re:[windbg] Debugging Windows 2000 with x64 Debugger
Any hint or pointer appreciated… Thanks!
I think that the hint is that both Pat and Jake work for Microsoft.
It wouldn’t suprise me if tracking what must be the hundreds of millions of
lines of code which Microsoft has used in products, over very many years,
probably just as many reorganizations, and quite probably a few changes of
tools, is not as simple as one might hope.
WINDBG is sponsored by OSR
For our schedule of WDF, WDM, debugging and other seminars visit:
http://www.osr.com/seminars
To unsubscribe, visit the List Server section of OSR Online at
http://www.osronline.com/page.cfm?name=ListServer
That’s exactly the case. We switched source control systems between Windows
2000 and Windows XP.
Pat was really just trying to simplify the situation. He indicated that he
also knows that we still have the Win2K source. Incidentally, in my first
office at Microsoft, Pat was right across the hall from me for a while,
while we were working on Win2K. He took that office right after Doron
vacated it.
–
Jake Oshins
Hyper-V I/O Architect
Windows Kernel Group
This post implies no warranties and confers no rights.
“Rod Widdowson” wrote in message
news:xxxxx@windbg…
>> Any hint or pointer appreciated… Thanks!
>
> I think that the hint is that both Pat and Jake work for Microsoft.
>
> It wouldn’t suprise me if tracking what must be the hundreds of millions
> of lines of code which Microsoft has used in products, over very many
> years, probably just as many reorganizations, and quite probably a few
> changes of tools, is not as simple as one might hope.
>