(assuming you mean crosscompiling linux->windows)
To target 32-bit x86 targets use a 32-bit x86 compiler. IOW make sure your installed *nix compiler is 32-bit.
And show commandlines etc.
Are you running the Windows program from a network drive ? -> NOThe Windows loader doesn't check the executable. It couldn't even do a CRC check since all there is in the executable, is a basic checksum (and the loader ignores it.)
i try to download file in two different way
1. from http server
2. from ftp server
both way is same issue.
Though it is unclear, based on the screenshot you posted, it looks like the program may be trying to access one or more files.
copy into flash drive and run from flash same issue
copy file form flash drive into hard disk same issue.
Application is running when Removed Application ICON
Why that happened? Application icon causes the binary fail to start? Can anyone please explain?The PNG format includes a CRC. Based on the last screenshot he posted, a PNG that he included (and is using) in his program is corrupted (bad CRC.)
He might have a corrupt image file...It is possible, actually quite likely, that the image file is fine. The problem is most likely caused by his including a bad PNG in the exe (apparently as an icon.)
He might have a corrupt image file...If he is right, and the same exe, with the same image, did work on win-7... Then it sounds like the png reader depends on something that is not working. Or at least not for some subsets of png...
He might have a corrupt image file...It is possible, actually quite likely, that the image file is fine. The problem is most likely caused by his including a bad PNG in the exe (apparently as an icon.)
I meant "image" as in graphics image, not binary executable image. :PIn this particular case the term "image" is rather ambiguous <chuckle>
What happens if you use these compiler switches:
-O2 -g- -Xs -CpPENTIUM4 -CfSSE3
To target 32-bit x86 targets use a 32-bit x86 compiler. IOW make sure your installed *nix compiler is 32-bit.Compiling for i386 is only a problem with x86_64-win64 and any non-x86 target. x86_64-linux for example can compile for i386-win32 without any problems.
Vista and Win8 changed icons a lot. (larger, png instead only bmp). But for the icon, there would be no fcl-image exception, since those icons would be loaded by the explorer.jshah wrote that removing the application icon solved it. Icon files have multiple sizes defined in them and in Vista and newer aside from bitmap data - as you wrote - can also contain PNG data. The default application icon of Lazarus does contain such data. Maybe the resource mechanism gets confused on XP with the PNG subicon or Lazarus somehow picks the wrong one.
So the question remains where the image comes from
To target 32-bit x86 targets use a 32-bit x86 compiler. IOW make sure your installed *nix compiler is 32-bit.Compiling for i386 is only a problem with x86_64-win64 and any non-x86 target. x86_64-linux for example can compile for i386-win32 without any problems.
Vista and Win8 changed icons a lot. (larger, png instead only bmp). But for the icon, there would be no fcl-image exception, since those icons would be loaded by the explorer.jshah wrote that removing the application icon solved it. Icon files have multiple sizes defined in them and in Vista and newer aside from bitmap data - as you wrote - can also contain PNG data. The default application icon of Lazarus does contain such data. Maybe the resource mechanism gets confused on XP with the PNG subicon or Lazarus somehow picks the wrong one.
So the question remains where the image comes from
Not the Explorer, but the window/application icon. That is set by Lazarus code.QuoteVista and Win8 changed icons a lot. (larger, png instead only bmp). But for the icon, there would be no fcl-image exception, since those icons would be loaded by the explorer.jshah wrote that removing the application icon solved it. Icon files have multiple sizes defined in them and in Vista and newer aside from bitmap data - as you wrote - can also contain PNG data. The default application icon of Lazarus does contain such data. Maybe the resource mechanism gets confused on XP with the PNG subicon or Lazarus somehow picks the wrong one.
So the question remains where the image comes from
If true that means actual lzarus code is mediator between resources and windows/explorer for the icons. That is IMHO somewhat doubtfull, since that would mean that the windows explorer would have to launch all exes to get the icon.
Still it could be that somehow Lazarus falsely manifests a "live icon" or so that makes that happen