I swear I should do a winhec tutorial on process best practices for driver
development.
There are very good reasons for having multiple ddks installed. Here are
some:
you have your build system entirely under source control, including third
party libraries and tools such as the ddk, so that you can reliably rebuild
your products for any given version.
there are explicit dependencies between kits and ddks, e.g. the last
released IFS kit contains DDK 3790 while KMDF1.0 requires DDK 3790.1830.
you maintain back rev products build for obsolete ddks such as NT4 or
windos9x.
My development system has installed ddks going back to the last NT4 ddk. My
build systems use a combination of 3790 ddk for older products with IFS kit
dependencies, the 3790.1830 ddk for KMDF products and the latest beta WDK
for everything else. These ddks co-exist happily with each other, and their
respective dependent products get built by my build systems every night.
=====================
Mark Roddy DDK MVP
Windows 2003/XP/2000 Consulting
Hollis Technology Solutions 603-321-1032 www.hollistech.com
-----Original Message-----
From: xxxxx@lists.osr.com
[mailto:xxxxx@lists.osr.com] On Behalf Of MM
Sent: Friday, December 23, 2005 8:41 AM
To: Windows System Software Devs Interest List
Subject: Re: [ntdev] localmon
Never heard of making two different ddk’s co-exist, although
I’m sure it’s possible somehow… Actually, I’ve read many
times it is unwise to install two different ddks. I would
hope someone more experianced on this list could clarify this…
Bedanto wrote:
> >You didn’t make a dumb
> >basic mistake like I have before by installing a second
ddk did you?
> >I installed the ifs ontop of and existing ddk when I first got it,
> >and that killed the build enviroment. When I made that
fatal mistake,
> >I also had this same problem (just like when I had spaces in the
> >path), same output - whole lotta jack shit.
>
> Actually I have two machines, on one I *did* install the ifs with
> another DDK, both co-exist (microsoft claims that it is possible),
> both compile and link (except this sample), the second
machine (same
> configuration h/w and s/w) has only IFS, clean
installation, and the
> same problem is there too!!!
>
> >You can only have a single driver kit builder installed at
a time…
> >Other than that, I’m out of ideas on this one…
>
> Wow, wow, I don’t think that is what was written in the
documentaiton?
> Or am I having a mem failure too…can’t help it, with
X-mas round the
> corner…remembering these things become difficult…
>
> anyway, my first machine does have both and things do work,
the second
> machine being clean of DDK should behave , but doesnt…
> — Questions? First check the Kernel Driver FAQ at
> http://www.osronline.com/article.cfm?id=256 You are currently
> subscribed to ntdev as: unknown lmsubst tag argument: ‘’ To
> unsubscribe send a blank email to xxxxx@lists.osr.com
Oh Mark, you should also have a 98 DDK and maybe even a 95 DDK too. If
nothing else they can remind you of how bad it was back then. If you want
to be known as an old pioneer, maybe even a half an OS DDK too. Disk space
is cheap. No fair not installing the old SDK if you have a NT4 DDK. I know
you can do without it, but it is not ‘really’ how it used to be.
I guess since it is Christmas and all the other holidays time, I should ask
about an update to DDKBUILD.
“Mark Roddy” wrote in message news:xxxxx@ntdev… >I swear I should do a winhec tutorial on process best practices for driver > development. > > There are very good reasons for having multiple ddks installed. Here are > some: > 1) you have your build system entirely under source control, including > third > party libraries and tools such as the ddk, so that you can reliably > rebuild > your products for any given version. > 2) there are explicit dependencies between kits and ddks, e.g. the last > released IFS kit contains DDK 3790 while KMDF1.0 requires DDK 3790.1830. > 3) you maintain back rev products build for obsolete ddks such as NT4 or > windos9x. > > My development system has installed ddks going back to the last NT4 ddk. > My > build systems use a combination of 3790 ddk for older products with IFS > kit > dependencies, the 3790.1830 ddk for KMDF products and the latest beta WDK > for everything else. These ddks co-exist happily with each other, and > their > respective dependent products get built by my build systems every night. > > > ===================== > Mark Roddy DDK MVP > Windows 2003/XP/2000 Consulting > Hollis Technology Solutions 603-321-1032 > www.hollistech.com > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: xxxxx@lists.osr.com >> [mailto:xxxxx@lists.osr.com] On Behalf Of MM >> Sent: Friday, December 23, 2005 8:41 AM >> To: Windows System Software Devs Interest List >> Subject: Re: [ntdev] localmon >> >> Never heard of making two different ddk’s co-exist, although >> I’m sure it’s possible somehow… Actually, I’ve read many >> times it is unwise to install two different ddks. I would >> hope someone more experianced on this list could clarify this… >> >> Bedanto wrote: >> >> > >You didn’t make a dumb >> > >basic mistake like I have before by installing a second >> ddk did you? >> > >I installed the ifs ontop of and existing ddk when I first got it, >> > >and that killed the build enviroment. When I made that >> fatal mistake, >> > >I also had this same problem (just like when I had spaces in the >> > >path), same output - whole lotta jack shit. >> > >> > Actually I have two machines, on one I did install the ifs with >> > another DDK, both co-exist (microsoft claims that it is possible), >> > both compile and link (except this sample), the second >> machine (same >> > configuration h/w and s/w) has only IFS, clean >> installation, and the >> > same problem is there too!!! >> > >> > >You can only have a single driver kit builder installed at >> a time… >> > >Other than that, I’m out of ideas on this one… >> > >> > Wow, wow, I don’t think that is what was written in the >> documentaiton? >> > Or am I having a mem failure too…can’t help it, with >> X-mas round the >> > corner…remembering these things become difficult… >> > >> > anyway, my first machine does have both and things do work, >> the second >> > machine being clean of DDK should behave , but doesnt… >> > — Questions? First check the Kernel Driver FAQ at >> > http://www.osronline.com/article.cfm?id=256 You are currently >> > subscribed to ntdev as: unknown lmsubst tag argument: ‘’ To >> > unsubscribe send a blank email to xxxxx@lists.osr.com >> >> >> >> — >> Questions? First check the Kernel Driver FAQ at >> http://www.osronline.com/article.cfm?id=256 >> >> You are currently subscribed to ntdev as: >> xxxxx@hollistech.com To unsubscribe send a blank email to >> xxxxx@lists.osr.com >> > > > >
so what is the final outcome of this discussion, is it a bug in the DDK? or
is it a restriction with the sample. can someone please clarify???
-bedanto
Using w2k sp4, it builds for me, so don’t claim it’s a ddk bug or
‘sample restriction’ untill you can show why it compiles on my system
and not yours.
“so what is the final outcome of this discussion” - apparently you
screwed your system up.
Bedanto wrote:
so what is the final outcome of this discussion, is it a bug in the
DDK? or is it a restriction with the sample. can someone please clarify???
-bedanto
Sorry, but I can’t make much sense out of this discussion at all.
Mark Roddy is, as usual, right. OF COURSE, it’s possible for multiple DDK’s to co-exist. In the old days, back through NT V4, it was annoying to make it work, but it DID work when done right. Since at least XP (I can’t remember when it started) the DDK installs in a build-number-specific directory. So it’s trivial to have multiple DDKs installed. i do it all the time.
What’s the deal with some app not building in some DDK or some specific build environment? Plenty of samples only build in specific target OS build environments. This happens when the features that they use aren’t supported by the down-rev OS, when features used in a down-rev sample are deprecated in a later OS, and when the older build files for the samples don’t work with newer DDK options. What’s the problem with that?
You wanna debug the problem? Go through the build command files (makefile.def, for example) and find out where/when/why the message you’re seeing is being produced. Help yourself a bit.
IIRC, the message in question means just what it says: The sample isn’t supported on the platform you’re trying to build it for. Why is this such a mystery?
