Board index » cppbuilder » Access violation in vcl40.bpl

Access violation in vcl40.bpl

2008-01-26 04:18:57 AM
I wrote an application using Borland C++ Builder 4 (with both updates)
that has been running for a couple years on an older PC (probably 2
years old) with a 2.0 GHz CPU under windows XP. We've recently
installed it on a new PC with a 3.0 GHz processor running windows 2000
(with all the updates). We added a shortcut to the application into
the startup folder, and the application *appears* to start fine.
However, if we select File->Open in the application, which opens a
Borland file dialog box, we get the error:
"Access violation at address 40050738 in module 'Vcl40.bpl'. Read
of address 00000004."
The same error occurs if we click 'About' which should display a form
showing version information. In summary, if the process opens any
additional form, we get the access violation in vcl40.bpl.
We also discovered that we have no problems if the program is started
manually with a user click and *not* from the startup folder. Thus,
as a work-around, we made a batch file which has a 60 second sleep in
it before it launches the application. The program is now running
I've tried to duplicate the error on the windows 2000 PC in my office
with no success. I'm guessing it is because it is a slower PC (mine
is only 450 MHz).
Are there any known problems with an application starting too
quickly? Is there some problem with my program which is causing the
access violation? Any help would be appreciated.

Re:Access violation in vcl40.bpl

An update to my earlier post. We've narrowed down the problem to
pcAnywhere. The PC running this application has pcAnywhere 11.5 host
installed. If someone logs in, the app still works fine. As soon as
the remote user logs out, then the app generates the access error.
So on logout, pcAnywhere is upsetting things in vcl40.bpl which causes
an access violation. We've been racking our brains on this for weeks
now - we are finally a [big] step closer to solution. Anyone else
have a similar problem? It looks like a similar problem to another
post here at:
although in that case it was different remote control software being
used. In any case, anyone know of a solution?