Re: Compilng and Linking Windows 2000 compatible driver with

OK
At last I made it to compile a Release version (Free) of my driver with the
2003 DDK - using the lldvrm.lib I just “compiled”
I’m still considering if it is safe enough to use it…
Thanks anyway for the help…
I will try to report Microsoft about this bug anyhow…

Alon

“Tim Roberts” wrote in message news:xxxxx@ntdev…
> Alon Elhanani wrote:
>
> >Well, with all the answers/suggestions, I really lost you somehow…
> >I think I saw the following options:
> >1. Use RtlLargeIntegerXXX fucntions (which are obsolete
> >2. Use the XP/2003 Libs instead the 2K
> >3. Use the obj’s (how?)
> >
> >
>
> Christiaan’s instructions show you how to extract the necessary routines
> to a separate library, called lldvrm.lib. All you have to do is add
> that library to your list of TARGETLIBS in your SOURCES file.
>
> >4. Report about the problem Microsoft (any way to check if they already
> >have it reported??)
> >
> >
>
> Microsoft is extremely unlikely to do anything official about this.
> Windows 2000 is practically an antique by this point.
>
> –
> Tim Roberts, xxxxx@probo.com
> Providenza & Boekelheide, Inc.
>
>

Alon Elhanani wrote:

OK
At last I made it to compile a Release version (Free) of my driver with the
2003 DDK - using the lldvrm.lib I just “compiled”
I’m still considering if it is safe enough to use it…

Have you looked at the code? It is nothing but simple arithmetic.
(Well, multiple-precision division isn’t exactly “simple”…) There are
no external dependencies. There are no outside function calls. It is
completely self-contained. You could use this object module in a DOS
program, a user-mode app, or even a Linux kernel module, and it would be
perfectly safe. There is nothing to it.


Tim Roberts, xxxxx@probo.com
Providenza & Boekelheide, Inc.

Ths issue is that my driver was compiled and QA’ed and distributed for the
last years with the Windows 2000 DDK
Now there are 2 chagnes:

  1. I compiled it with the 2003 DDK (2K Env) - That means a different
    compiler, a different linker, different timings? and etc…
  2. I’m doing something that is not “documented”

Regarding ‘1’ - nothing to do, it is a (small) risk but if I assume no
regration made with this DDK so it should be only better…
Regarding ‘2’ - I beleive you’ll agree that it would have been better if I
could simply compile and link my driver without extracting and re-linking
objects in a way that nobody testedqtried before…

“Tim Roberts” wrote in message news:xxxxx@ntdev…
> Alon Elhanani wrote:
>
> >OK
> >At last I made it to compile a Release version (Free) of my driver with
the
> >2003 DDK - using the lldvrm.lib I just “compiled”
> >I’m still considering if it is safe enough to use it…
> >
> >
>
> Have you looked at the code? It is nothing but simple arithmetic.
> (Well, multiple-precision division isn’t exactly “simple”…) There are
> no external dependencies. There are no outside function calls. It is
> completely self-contained. You could use this object module in a DOS
> program, a user-mode app, or even a Linux kernel module, and it would be
> perfectly safe. There is nothing to it.
>
> –
> Tim Roberts, xxxxx@probo.com
> Providenza & Boekelheide, Inc.
>
>