NPP v6.6.9 last W2K version? ohh no! All update >v6.7 don't run under W2K
-
Hello Jim,
thanks for your answer.
I’ve tried auto-update in npp, install.exe and manually with .7z.
Unfortunately doesn’t work.
All versions >= v6.7 don’t work with Win2000. (I have tested with two Win2000-systems)
Error message: “notepad++.exe is not a valid win32 application”
(sorry, for my bad english ;-)
Thanks and regards,
Ip -
It may be time to let go of Windows 2000. I mean, it was great and all, but…
-
@Alan Kilborn
thank you for your answer. But, please no discussion for and again an OS system.Win2000 is lean, stable and working. Reset only once a year … has been running for over 16 years.
DOS: 1 + 1 = 2
AmigaOS: 1 + 1 = 2
Win95: 1 + 1 = 2
NT4: 1 + 1 = 2
OS/2: 1 + 1 = 2
MacOS: 1 + 1 = 2
W2K: 1 + 1 = 2
XP: 1 + 1 = 2
W7: 1 + 1 = 2
W10: 1 + 1 = 2
ohhh … Linux: 1 + 1 = 2
and so on … all results are the same :-)Sorry, but your answer is not intended for me.
There may be only two small source changes between 6.6.9 and 6.7, which can be responsible for this problem.
Unfortunately I have no compilation environment for npp and can not compile “trail & error”. I have installations only Delphi7 / FreePascal. ;-)
greets
Ip -
Just curious, what is all the 1+1 = 2 stuff ?? I don’t get it…
In case you didn’t see this other post recently, the author of Notepad++ has hinted (I think, if I am reading his posting correctly) that the 32-bit build of N++ has very-limited life left.
https://notepad-plus-plus.org/community/topic/13285/new-release-7-3-2/9Can your Windows2000 run 64-bit executables?
Good luck to you. :)
-
I think the 1+1=2 stuff is the OP’s way of saying that all these OSes are equivalent, i.e., they all add 1+1 the same. Other than that, I have no comment on this thread. :)
-
all version over 6.6.9 don’t run under W2K.
why not?Because honestly at some point backwards compatibility is dropped in order to take advantage of newer features to provide a better tool for the majority of users.
v6.6.9 was release in 2014…that is 14 years of support for W2K…which is quite a long time if you ask me. If you choose to run an older OS (which by all means is your choice) you shouldn’t be surprised when new software doesn’t support it.
-
Personally I think that Win2K was the greatest OS Microsoft has ever produced.
Microsoft tried to kill it as quickly as they could because of the very important missing feature “activation”.
Now, there shouldn’t be a technical reason for not supporting Win2K. Notepad++ tech is just legacy enough to fit it perfectly. But …
Microsoft current compilers and DLLs are no longer compatible. At least by default. It probably should be possible to compile current 32 bit Notepad++ for W2K, but it will take an effort to tweak the build tools. And nobody is going to do it or even bother to install Win2K to test it.But Notepad++ is open source. Feel free trying to build it on your own.
One small additional comment. From experience I know that NPP added use of some advanced C++ that is not supported by W2K era compilers. It does not mean that new compilers can’t be forced to produce W2K compatible binaries but it makes things more difficult.
-
see https://qualapps.blogspot.de/2010/04/visual-c-2010-apps-dont-support-windows.html and https://tedwvc.wordpress.com/2010/11/07/how-to-get-visual-c-2010-mfc-applications-to-run-on-windows-2000/
Seems VS2008 is the last dev studio providing win2k support.Currently used VS2013 just supports builds for WIN XP SP3 and newer.
Maybe mingw64 builds would still be compatible.
-
@gstavi said:
And nobody is going to do it or even bother to install Win2K to test it.
If someone has a chance to build it, I am willing to test Notepad++ under Win2k. We still have a couple of machines running this OS, and no easy way to upgrade them.
I confirm that Notepad++ 6.6.9 is the latest to work under Windows 2000, although it does not work right out of the box. The reason: it comes with plugin NppFTP version 0.2.5.0, which is too new. The solution is to disable this plugin, or downgrade it to version 0.2.4.0.
-
@gstavi said:
Personally I think that Win2K was the greatest OS Microsoft has ever produced.
…
And nobody is going to do it or even bother to install Win2K to test it.Agreed! I could test as I have a win2k machine handy but after looking into what’s needed there’s too much pain involved.
The hassle is that it npp is compiled with Visual Studio.
I verified the OP’s finding using the .7z packages that 6.6.9 is the last version that works on Win2k. The nppFTP plugin blows up but once that’s disabled then npp 6.6.9 works fine.
npp 6.7 fails to start with “npp is not a valid win32 application.” The process is not even launched.
I checked the PE headers.
v6.6.9 will work on Windows NT
8.0 linker version (compiled with Visual Studio 2005)
4.0 operating system version
4.0 subsystem versionv6.7 will work on Windows XP on up.
12.0 linker version (compiled with Visual Studio 2013)
5.1 operating system version
5.1 subsystem versionWindows NT is version 4.0, 2000 is version 5.0, XP is 5.1, and 2003 is 5.2.
Microsoft dropped support in the Visual Studio CRT as APIs such as HeapSetInformation() were added in Windows XP that are useful enough to the CRT that Microsoft chose to just bail-out rather than trying to work around not having those functions available.
Ideally, Microsoft would have added HeapSetInformation() and related APIs to Kernel32.dll via Windows Update but then there never would be a reason to buy an newer operating system version.
One workaround that may work is to compile with VS2013 but to link with VS 2005.
Unfortunately, SciLexer.dll may also needs to be compiled/linked the same way. It’s requesting a minimum operating system version of 6.0 which is Windows Vista.
-
Does the older version have nppFTP?
Is the older version possible for portable?
What is the last confirmed Notepad++ to work?I’m thinking of making a Windows 2000 Portable App collection, if I’m going to get a machine to run it. Just need to find and collect all the best app in a version that works.
I think you could get a decent set of programs, we had pretty much everything in the old days and only been going downward ever since.
So could you people confirm me the last Windows 2000 version and if it is portable? Does it have nppFTP? As long as things are working, I’m happy with an older version!
Dearly regards Darkijah
-
@Darkijah-Anders-Jehovahsøn said in NPP v6.6.9 last W2K version? ohh no! All update >v6.7 don't run under W2K:
So could you people confirm me the last Windows 2000 version
There’s THIS information, but I’ve no way to verify if it is correct.
-
@Alan-Kilborn Thanks I’m looking into the options at the moment in regards of very low power consumption hardware that can run windows 2000.
Notepad++ is the best, I use it for programming websites although not good at it.
I use the nppFTP as well all the time, so hopefully that is not missing in the Windows 2000 version. -
@Darkijah-Anders-Jehovahsøn said in NPP v6.6.9 last W2K version? ohh no! All update >v6.7 don't run under W2K:
I use the nppFTP as well all the time, so hopefully that is not missing in the Windows 2000 version.
For version 6.6.9, the nppFTP plugin is indeed bundled into the release, so perhaps you are in good shape!
-
@Alan-Kilborn Awesome!!! :)
Would be nice with a fully portable package of Windows 2000 Applications. I think I can do it, and I don’t even need to think of updating apps for the most part :P Just to find the last working edition.
I’m trying to figure out the best option of hardware for windows 2000, that will be the next thing… Or I can collect some Windows 2000 apps and begin collecting them for the overall Portable project.
I’ve used portable for years and years… And here are some of my notes and collections of apps although have yet to make a fully Zipfile with everything sorted out but links for the apps are there:
http://jesusgod-pope666.info/portableapps.php -
@NippurDeLagash Well… hmmm
-
@Darkijah-Anders-Jehovahsøn said in NPP v6.6.9 last W2K version? ohh no! All update >v6.7 don't run under W2K:
@NippurDeLagash Well… hmmm
If you’re looking for a reply from a user that posted something in this thread 5 years ago, and hasn’t been on this forum in 2022, well, don’t get your hopes up.
-
@Alan-Kilborn You never know :)
Anyway looking into getting some windows 2000 hardware collected, I think I think I have thought things through enough.
