flat assembler
Message board for the users of flat assembler.
![]() |
Author |
|
dasyar
I tried running FASM on my Win XP x64 system, for some reason it would not run. Am I missing something, or is FASM not 64 bit ready yet?
Thanks |
|||
![]() |
|
hckr83
hmm..it should run 32bit applications using that one little host program..wierd..
|
|||
![]() |
|
r22
XP 64 is 32bit compatible, so any 32bit program will run on it using the WOW64.
FASMW works fine on WIN XP 64, I've had no reason to use the commandline since I no longer live in the 1980s and GUIs<>devil ![]() ![]() Fasm has issues on Vista64 when trying to run a program you compiled with FORMAT PE64 but there's no such problem on winXP 64. |
|||
![]() |
|
dasyar
Thanks for the info.
I have always worked with FASM DOS version, I found it to be easy and straight foreward. Since the FASM DOS version no longer works in a DOS box on x64, then I guess I have to make some choices; sometimes progress is very painfull. |
|||
![]() |
|
Azu
r22 wrote: XP 64 is 32bit compatible, so any 32bit program will run on it using the WOW64. |
|||
![]() |
|
f0dder
dasyar: 16bit code is not supported in 64bit LONG mode - thus if a x86-64 OS wants to run 16bit applications, it would have to include an emulator. Just use the win32 console version instead
![]() Azu: of course it can - if it fails to run a PE64, either fasm is outputting it incorrectly or (more likely) there's something wrong with the source code. |
|||
![]() |
|
Azu
f0dder wrote: dasyar: 16bit code is not supported in 64bit LONG mode - thus if a x86-64 OS wants to run 16bit applications, it would have to include an emulator. Just use the win32 console version instead |
|||
![]() |
|
f0dder
Azu wrote:
64bit Vista and Win7 definitely do support PE64 files - which is pretty duh ![]() _________________ ![]() |
|||
![]() |
|
LocoDelAssembly
Quote:
Just a clarification here, what it is not supported is the Virtual-8086 mode, 16-bit protected mode apps can still be ran in long-mode. |
|||
![]() |
|
Azu
f0dder wrote:
|
|||
![]() |
|
f0dder
Azu wrote: Well then those constraints should be public, so compilers can be made to work within them.. _________________ ![]() |
|||
![]() |
|
< Last Thread | Next Thread > |
Forum Rules:
|
Copyright © 1999-2020, Tomasz Grysztar. Also on GitHub, YouTube, Twitter.
Website powered by rwasa.