Hey Folks,
I just started working with Windows Me, and have just installed a Windows 98
Driver that I developed for 98/2000. It is a USB device driver. My question
is this:
We currently support two builds of the driver, one for 2000 and one for 98.
I have done some research on Me, and found that it implements WDM 1.05. The
Windows 98 driver, when installed on a Me Test system seems to work fine. Is
it safe to assume that Me is backwards compatible with 98. Is it safe to
distribute a working Windows 98 driver to Me customers or should I re-build
the driver under Me, and distribute 3 versions of the driver.
Thanks
-Chris
Christopher Pane
Software Engineer
Vanteon
2851 Clover Street
Pittsford, NY 14534
Tel: (716) 248-0510 (Ext 232)
Fax: (716) 248-0537
email: xxxxx@vanteon.com
web: www.vanteon.com
Hello ,
PC> We currently support two builds of the driver, one for 2000 and one for 98.
Why you do this ??
My USB drivers are always the same for Windows 98, Windows 98SE,
Windows ME and Windows 2000 and I hope so for Whistler.
Here is no reason to build different binaries. Is your code the same
?. When you have different code for different OS, than you can
detect dynamicly the OS. I use the USBDI Version to detect the
current OS.
elli
>
PC> We currently support two builds of the driver, one for
2000 and one for 98.
Why you do this ??
I was under the impression that Windows 2000 and Windows 98 drivers were not
necessarily Binary compatible. That when Windows 2000 was in an early BETA
cycle, they had stated that you could install the same build of a driver on
98 or 2000 (Assuming you did not use any WDM 1.1 calls of course) but then
retracted that statement in the final release of 2000. I think I heard this
in the OSR WDM Seminar I attended, but am not sure.
I was under the assumption that is was “Safer” to build separate drivers for
each OS.
-Chris
Christopher Pane
Software Engineer
Vanteon
2851 Clover Street
Pittsford, NY 14534
Tel: (716) 248-0510 (Ext 232)
Fax: (716) 248-0537
email: xxxxx@vanteon.com
web: www.vanteon.com
And I believe you are essentially correct. You can build a one-binary driver
but then you have to either degrade your w2k driver to the 98 subset of WDM
or take Walter Oney’s approach, and add a WDM1.1 compatibility vxd to win98
along with your driver.
Mark Roddy
xxxxx@hollistech.com
www.hollistech.com
WindowsNT Windows 2000 Consulting Services
-----Original Message-----
From: Pane, Chris [mailto:xxxxx@vanteon.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2000 10:37 AM
To: NT Developers Interest List
Subject: [ntdev] Re: Windows ME vs. 98 vs. 2000
>
> PC> We currently support two builds of the driver, one for
> 2000 and one for 98.
>
> Why you do this ??
I was under the impression that Windows 2000 and Windows 98
drivers were not
necessarily Binary compatible. That when Windows 2000 was in
an early BETA
cycle, they had stated that you could install the same build
of a driver on
98 or 2000 (Assuming you did not use any WDM 1.1 calls of
course) but then
retracted that statement in the final release of 2000. I
think I heard this
in the OSR WDM Seminar I attended, but am not sure.
I was under the assumption that is was “Safer” to build
separate drivers for
each OS.
-Chris
Christopher Pane
Software Engineer
Vanteon
2851 Clover Street
Pittsford, NY 14534
Tel: (716) 248-0510 (Ext 232)
Fax: (716) 248-0537
email: xxxxx@vanteon.com
web: www.vanteon.com
You are currently subscribed to ntdev as: xxxxx@stratus.com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to $subst(‘Email.Unsub’)
Since the only WDM 1.1 functionality I needed was the IoRemoveLock, I ended
up implementing my own and conditionally compiling it in.
So let me put this question out the News Group -
Assuming that your driver only uses WDM 1.0 functionality -
Is it safe to use ONE binary version of the driver (Built with either
Windows Me DDK or the Windows 98 DDK or the Windows 2000 DDK) for all Target
OS’s (2000/98/Me).
The reason I ask, is we are getting ready to submit our device/drivers to
Windows for WHQL testing, and If we can submit one binary that works on all
platforms that would save lots of time and $$.
Thanks !
-Chris
And I believe you are essentially correct. You can build a
one-binary driver
but then you have to either degrade your w2k driver to the 98
subset of WDM
or take Walter Oney’s approach, and add a WDM1.1
compatibility vxd to win98
along with your driver.
Mark Roddy
xxxxx@hollistech.com
www.hollistech.com
WindowsNT Windows 2000 Consulting Services
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Pane, Chris [mailto:xxxxx@vanteon.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2000 10:37 AM
> To: NT Developers Interest List
> Subject: [ntdev] Re: Windows ME vs. 98 vs. 2000
>
>
> >
> > PC> We currently support two builds of the driver, one for
> > 2000 and one for 98.
> >
> > Why you do this ??
>
> I was under the impression that Windows 2000 and Windows 98
> drivers were not
> necessarily Binary compatible. That when Windows 2000 was in
> an early BETA
> cycle, they had stated that you could install the same build
> of a driver on
> 98 or 2000 (Assuming you did not use any WDM 1.1 calls of
> course) but then
> retracted that statement in the final release of 2000. I
> think I heard this
> in the OSR WDM Seminar I attended, but am not sure.
>
> I was under the assumption that is was “Safer” to build
> separate drivers for
> each OS.
>
>
>
> -Chris
>
> Christopher Pane
> Software Engineer
> Vanteon
>
> 2851 Clover Street
> Pittsford, NY 14534
> Tel: (716) 248-0510 (Ext 232)
> Fax: (716) 248-0537
>
> email: xxxxx@vanteon.com
> web: www.vanteon.com
>
>
> —
> You are currently subscribed to ntdev as: xxxxx@stratus.com
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to $subst(‘Email.Unsub’)
>
You are currently subscribed to ntdev as: xxxxx@vanteon.com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to $subst(‘Email.Unsub’)
> Here is no reason to build different binaries. Is your code the same
IIRC the USB stack binaries are the same on Win9x and w2k.
(the USB stack evolve, but simultaneously on these OSes. Something like -
WinME’s USB stack is the same as w2k SP1’s or such).
Max