Board index » cppbuilder » [FYE:] Data Execution Prevention and C++ Builder 5

2006-09-28 09:30:37 PM
cppbuilder11
Hi,
if someone of you still dares to install the good old C++ Builder 5 on a
modern PC (e.g. Core 2 Duo, your processor must support the NX-Flag)
with Data Execution Prevention enabled then you'll notice that loading
the ITE (dclite...) will fail and that opening the options dialog of any
project will lead to two access violations. That's a real show stopper
as you have to modify your project options by hand then ;-((
In Windows 2003 server the DEP is enabled by default and you'll get
these problems with BCB5 (maybe other versions are affected, too). To
come around this problem you can:
- Exclude BCB from DEP
- Disable DEP for all applications
Just a short hint for Windows 2003 Server users.
Bye,
--
Dipl. Ing. Oliver Rutsch
EMail: XXXX@XXXXX.COM
Sympatec GmbH
 

Oliver Rutsch wrote:
one core)?
BTW does Windows XP support multiple cores?!
Thanks
//David
 

David Scheffel wrote:
--
Andrue Cope [TeamB]
[Bicester, Uk]
info.borland.com/newsgroups/guide.html
 

{smallsort}

David Scheffel < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote:
NT 5.1, so I'd not expect them to have broken that ability.
(Actually, I think all versions of Windows NT have supported it.)
Alan Bellingham
--
Team Thai Kingdom
<url:www.borland.com/newsgroups/>Borland newsgroup descriptions
<url:www.borland.com/newsgroups/netiquette.html>netiquette
 

David Scheffel wroteL
Jonathan
 

Hi David,
[...]
mechanism which schould avoid code execution in data segments.
image analysis software (Core 2 duo E6600 against P4-630). That's really
great stuff from intel.
Bye, Oliver
 

Oliver Rutsch wrote:
and intend to do this with a multi-core cpu sometime in future as well.
Probably with an AMD, but I guess that will work the same way. Does
anybody disagree?
Thanks..
David
 

David Scheffel wrote:
Duo and Core 2 Extreme are the fastest CPU's around. For example, the 2.4Ghz
Core 2 Duo is approximately 36% faster that the fastest AMD chip.
Jonathan
 

"Jonathan Benedicto" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote:
Personally, I never buy the fastest available. I tend to buy at the
sweet point of the price/performance curve.
Alan Bellingham
--
ACCU Conference: 11-14 April 2007 - Paramount Oxford Hotel
 

Alan Bellingham wrote:
BTW are there any free performance curves available on the internet (AMD
versus Intel)? Probably including the older models (single core) as well.
Thanks..
David
 

David Scheffel wrote:
www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx
Jonathan
 

David Scheffel < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote:
Going between different processor types is (and always has been) tricky,
since different processors excel in different areas. Look at comparative
reviews, consider what you actually want the extra speed for (not
necessarily what you spend most time doing, because that may not be
processor bound), and then try to work out how the performance compares
doing that.
In general, Intel have a very nice range at the moment, having been
somewhat behind AMD at the beginning of the year. For performance
enthusiasts, it's unlikely that AMD will catch up before the start of
next year (unless you're going multi-socket as well as multi-core - I'm
holding out right now for the AMD 4x4 architecture - the AMD
architecture currently seems to scale better to larger numbers of
cores.). However, AMD has responded by dropping their prices. (There was
the interesting situation about a year ago, when the top end AMD chips
actually cost more than the top end Intel ones. Mind you, they were much
faster.)
Having said which, you're unlike to regret either the current Intel or
AMD range, so long as you get a 64-bit multi-core processor, unless all
you do is {*word*143}, in which case single core processors can run some
games faster. (Multi-core processors tend to run each core more slowly
than a single core one does, and if you have one single-threaded task to
worry about, then the single core is going to have an advantage. On the
other hand, newer games coming out will be multi-threaded.)
Alan Bellingham
--
ACCU Conference: 11-14 April 2007 - Paramount Oxford Hotel
 

Worth mentioning (again) that applications built woith BCB5 won't run
on W2003 Server unless DEP is turned off for them...
Maybe there's a way of flagging this at install time?
- Roddy
 

"Jonathan Benedicto" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote:
processor E6600 (2.4GHz) ? (My new system with 4GB!!).
~ JD
 

JD wrote:
is miles slower than the Intel Core 2 Duo 2.4Ghz. Your PC will flatten mine
;-)
Jonathan