Bill
Tue Oct 16 08:55:51 PDT 2007
Don't remember all the problems, but installs keep backing out because of
But honestly,errors. I will check out your article. if it's this
difficult...I will run the checked HAL and kernel via bcdedit/boot.ini
replacement, but I am not wasting time trying to get a checked build to
install if it is this difficult. It's unfortunate.
Bill M.
"Don Burn" <burn@stopspam.windrvr.com> wrote in message
news:eBVGRiAEIHA.4308@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Bill,
>
> What is the problem you are having? There are unfortunately asserts
> that will trigger on a number of systems where the ACPI is not exactly
> what Microsoft expects. Also, a popular NIC card would cause ASSERT's.
> For both of these all you can do is modify the install so the debugger is
> running. This is too complex to explain here, but is in my article
>
http://www.osronline.com/article.cfm?article=264
>
>
> --
> Don Burn (MVP, Windows DDK)
> Windows 2k/XP/2k3 Filesystem and Driver Consulting
> Website:
http://www.windrvr.com
> Blog:
http://msmvps.com/blogs/WinDrvr
> Remove StopSpam to reply
>
>
> "Bill McKenzie" <bkmckenzie@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:%23QJNJdAEIHA.4332@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> One problem I keep having is I have a heck of a time getting the checked
>> version of the OS to install anywhere (XP). I don't know if the CD
>> images are bad or its just broke, but I have one machine out of 8 that I
>> can run the checked build on. Anyone else having these kinds of
>> problems?
>>
>> Bill M.
>>
>> "Don Burn" <burn@stopspam.windrvr.com> wrote in message
>> news:OzFp1z%23DIHA.536@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>> Tim,
>>>
>>> Having come out of a fault tolerant world that is a claim many
>>> people from FT believe, but there are two types of ASSERT's:
>>>
>>> 1. Light-weight - this is the type that fault tolerant systems
>>> use. For instance on a linked list operation check that the list head is
>>> consistent in an assert.
>>>
>>> 2 Heavy-weight - this is common in many systems including
>>> Windows. For the linked list example for every operation on the list
>>> walk every element and check they are consistent.
>>>
>>> Sorry the latter does not make sense in a production environment but
>>> is wonderful in a debugging environment. It would be great if Microsoft
>>> spent the effort to fix the ASSERT's and classifying them as the two
>>> types above so the heavy weight are removed in the free build but not
>>> the lightweight ones.
>>>
>>> It would be even better if they changed many of these to error
>>> returns but that would be a radical change to the kernel API's. Overall,
>>> I don't expect either since they are a lot of work, and the checked
>>> build is not getting much support in Redmond from what I see.
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Don Burn (MVP, Windows DDK)
>>> Windows 2k/XP/2k3 Filesystem and Driver Consulting
>>> Website:
http://www.windrvr.com
>>> Blog:
http://msmvps.com/blogs/WinDrvr
>>> Remove StopSpam to reply
>>>
>>>
>>> "Tim Roberts" <timr@probo.com> wrote in message
>>> news:54e8h3tbcnoaoat75ajmseg9bhojuc79el@4ax.com...
>>>> "Bill McKenzie" <bkmckenzie@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>Why is that on the checked build? I guess I guess I never have
>>>>>understood
>>>>>using an ASSERT for something that can render the system inoperable.
>>>>>Too
>>>>>costly in terms of time to check IRQL or something?
>>>>
>>>> Some people have said that turning off ASSERTs in release mode is like
>>>> removing the brakes from a car as it leaves the factory.
>>>> --
>>>> Tim Roberts, timr@probo.com
>>>> Providenza & Boekelheide, Inc.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>