Just when I thought I understood Microsoft's confusing naming with regard to WIN32 and WIN64 registry and folders I read this article (Using 32-bit or 64-bit ActiveX Components on x64 Windows) and find myself still a bit confused on how to properly register 32 bit and 64 bit OCX controls on the same WIN64 computer. From the article it says that on a WIN64 system the default regsvr32 is for registering 64 bit OCX controls and to register 32 bit versions of the OCX control I should use C:\windows\syswow64\regsvr32.exe. The thing is I've been registering my WIN32 OCX control using the default regsvr32.exe (in C:\windows\system32) and it seems to have been working fine when I run my 32 bit app which uses the 32 bit OCX. I have the following questions:
Q1 How has registering WIN32 OCX with default regsvr32 been working given what I read in the article.
Q2 I want to register both the WIN32 and WIN64 versions of the OCX control on a single computer. From the article it seems like I should use the two different versions of regsvr32.exe from syswow64 and system32 for WIN32 and WIN64 versions respectively. Is this correct?
Q3 Can the GUID for the OCX be the same for both the WIN32 and WIN64 versions? I'm thinking it can be the same since a different portion of the registry is used to register for each of these architectures. Correct?
Q4 Where do I look in the registry to confirm that both 64 and 32 bit versions of the OCX have been registered to confirm that registering the 2nd one didn't overwrite the first one?
Per suggestion in comment by Andrew here is my comments as an answer.
A1 & A2 Well since no one has replied to this I'll add what I've learned since posting. It seems the article I referenced is misleading in describing how to run 32 and 64 bit regsvr32.exe. From my own testing it seems that the default 64 bit regsvr32.exe can be used to register both 32bit and 64bit OCX controls. It seems regsvr32 (the 64 bit version at least) looks at the target OCX or DLL file and determines if it is 32 or 64 bit and installs it in the appropriate registry. There doesn't seem to be any need to use the 32 bit version of regsvr32 on 64bit windows.
A3 Yes both 64 and 32 bit versions can be registered which use the same GUID.
A4 For 32bit OCX in HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Wow6432Node\Classes\CLSID area of the registry and for 64 bit its in
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Classes\CLSID
Related
I just added the '64 bits platform' to my project and my Delphi (XE7) keeps generating a huge RSM file (which increases the compilation time). According to the Help this should not happen if the 'Include remote debug symbols' option is disabled.
And in my case it is disabled.
There is something else to be disabled?
from http://embarcadero.newsgroups.archived.at/public.delphi.ide/201203/12030416462.html
Delphi XE2 generates RSM files that are several MB in size. As I
understand it, these files are for remote debugging. Is there a way
to turn off the generation of these files?
Yes. In the Project Options look on the page "Delphi Compiler\Linking"
for "Include remote debug symbols" and turn it off if you do Win32
debugging. Note it is necessary for Win64 debugging.
and continuing on http://www.devsuperpage.com/search/Articles.aspx?G=2&ArtID=20168
The IDE is 32-bit, because that's the only way it can work on both 32
and 64 bit versions of Windows. (Win64 can run 32 bit apps, but Win32
can't run 64 bit apps.) That's why the remote debugger is used for 64
bit and cross-platform apps.
Jeff Overcash from TeamB
Is the reason that Delphi XE2 is not itself really 64-bit?
Sure, then it can't be run on 32 bit OS's. All third party components
won't work at all until a 64 bit version of it exists (a 64 bit IDE
would not be able to load a 32 bit bpl), this would be a major reason
for people not to upgrade too. Supporting both a 32 bit and 64 bit
IDE doubles the testing time for little to no benefit.
We have an Delphi application that has a built in com object. When compiled in Delphi XE3 (Windows 8) we can't reference it from Visual Studio C#. However, an older version that was compiled in Delphi 2010 (Windows 7) works as expected.
The com object registers without errors and i can access it by using VBA script in Excel. Has anyone come accross something like this?
The most likely explanation is a bitness mismatch. I'm assuming that the COM server is 32 bit since you have been compiling it in Delphi 2010.
Suppose that your COM server is an in-proc server. Then I guess that your failing host is a 64 bit application. If so then you need to make the bitness match. Most probably by switching your host to be 32 bit by targeting x86.
If the COM server is out-of-proc then the issue is with registration rather than executable bitness matching. It will be registered in the 32 bit registry view, but your 64 bit host is looking in the 64 bit view. This would explain why your 32 bit Excel VBA code can find it. You need to register the server in both 32 and 64 bit registry views. Or switch the host to 32 bit.
I've got a type library in a 32-bit Excel add-in app.
I need to translate the whole app to 64-bit.
I can't just copy paste the typelib, because the GUID's will clash with the already installed 32-bit app, ditto for the naming.
What's the best way to translate the application to 64 bit in a way that avoids name-clashes?
Or is there some mechanism that solves the name- and GUID-clashes automatically that I don't know about?
32 and 64 bit COM servers are registered in different registry views. So the 32 bit processes and 64 bit processes exist in disjoint GUID namespaces. In other words you use the same GUID for both 32 and 64 bit versions. The registry redirector does the rest.
My developer machine is a Windows 7 64bit and have some programs on 32 an others on 64 bits
since the upgrade of the 3.70FC3 and 3.70TC3, I'm having problems compiling with VisualStudio 2010 sp1.
maybe there is some configuration that I need to do to change 64 to 32 bit. Or maybe is not supported to have both csdk
If it is feasible, you select which is in use by setting $INFORMIXDIR (oops; I mean %INFORMIXDIR%) to the correct directory and any other related changes (the correct bin subdirectory added to %PATH%, etc).
If there isn't an easy way to switch such variables, then it may not be feasible; I avoid working on Windows so I can't report of my own experience. Classically, it was certainly expected that you would choose one version and stick with it. On Unix, it has been possible to have both, but there isn't the registry to complicate things.
I recently got a new laptop. Unfortunately, it came with Vista. It's been one big hassle getting it to work, and the comp has hardware components for which there are no XP drivers, so I can't "upgrade" to an OS that actually works. I've mostly gotten things working, but one particularly odd problem has me stumped.
I installed Delphi and tried to build a project. It compiled, but wouldn't run. "This application failed to start because sdl.dll was not found." Fair enough. So I grabbed SDL.dll and put it in the C:\windows\system32 folder. (Using Vista 64-bit Home Premium. This is a 32-bit dll, though, so I put it in the 32 folder instead of the 64 one.)
Hit Run again. Same problem. But why? That's where it goes, right? And C:\windows\system32 is in the system path. Anyone know why it can't link to the DLL?
(And yes, I know that I can work around the problem by putting the DLL in the same folder as the .exe. I'm currently doing that as a workaround. It's a bad idea in the long term, though, because I have a handful of different projects that all require SDL.)
That is not a Vista problem, but a 64 bit Windows problem: The name System32 is really confusing, but this is actually the folder where the systems (64 bit) DLLs reside.
So on any 64 bit version of Windows...
... all 64 bit system DLLs are located in C:\Windows\System32.
... all 32 bit system DLLs are located in C:\Windows\SysWOW64.
The name comes from Windows on Windows 64 (WOW64) which is the name of the translation layer allowing 32 bit applications to use the native 64 bit system resources.
Raymond Chen recently addressed the basic reason behind why 32-bit system directories are weird on 64-bit Windows. The first paragraph of the entry is really the key to understanding the reason behind segregated 32-bit directories:
On 64-bit Windows, 32-bit programs run
in an emulation layer...If a 32-bit
program tries to look at the system,
it will see a 32-bit system.
I think you'd have to have separate directories to keep these things all separate and working. The seemingly counter-intuitive name of SysWOW64 for the directory where the files reside is makes more sense when you consider that WOW64 means Windows On Windows 64-bit, which is what the emulater that's mentioned above is called.