Dwarf Fortress Bug Tracker - Dwarf Fortress
View Issue Details
IDProjectCategoryView StatusDate SubmittedLast Update
0003601Dwarf FortressTechnical -- Generalpublic2010-11-13 21:582012-02-16 14:23
ReporterManaUser 
Assigned ToFootkerchief 
PrioritynormalSeveritycrashReproducibilityalways
StatusresolvedResolutionwon't fix 
PlatformPCOSWindows XPOS VersionSP1
Product Version0.31.17 
Target VersionFixed in Version 
Summary0003601: 0.31.17 breaks compatibility with Windows XP SP1
DescriptionWhen I try to start the game, I get this message:

---------------------------
Dwarf Fortress.exe - Entry Point Not Found
---------------------------
The procedure entry point DecodePointer could not be located in the dynamic link library KERNEL32.dll.
---------------------------
OK
---------------------------

I guess this means my creaky old OS isn't supported anymore, is that right?
Steps To Reproduce
Additional InformationApplies to both Legacy and SDL versions.
TagsNo tags attached.
Relationships
related to 0005193resolved Footkerchief "Dwarf Fortress.exe is not a valid Win32 application." 
Attached Files
Issue History
Date ModifiedUsernameFieldChange
2010-11-13 21:58ManaUserNew Issue
2010-11-15 14:02FootkerchiefNote Added: 0013892
2010-11-15 16:58FootkerchiefSummaryGame won't start. ("DecodePointer" error.) => 0.31.17 breaks compatibility with Windows XP SP1
2010-11-15 17:11QuietustNote Added: 0013904
2010-11-19 15:01ManaUserNote Added: 0014028
2010-11-19 15:05QuietustNote Added: 0014029
2010-12-01 16:46ManaUserNote Added: 0014353
2010-12-01 17:06twilighduskNote Added: 0014354
2010-12-01 19:03twilighduskNote Edited: 0014354bug_revision_view_page.php?bugnote_id=0014354#r5461
2010-12-01 19:06twilighduskNote Edited: 0014354bug_revision_view_page.php?bugnote_id=0014354#r5462
2010-12-01 19:07twilighduskNote Edited: 0014354bug_revision_view_page.php?bugnote_id=0014354#r5463
2010-12-01 21:49Logical2uNote Added: 0014359
2010-12-02 06:25QuietustNote Added: 0014361
2010-12-02 08:01FootkerchiefTag Attached: Intentional/Expected?
2010-12-07 17:45NivmNote Added: 0014445
2012-02-16 14:19FootkerchiefNote Added: 0019846
2012-02-16 14:19FootkerchiefStatusnew => resolved
2012-02-16 14:19FootkerchiefResolutionopen => won't fix
2012-02-16 14:19FootkerchiefAssigned To => Footkerchief
2012-02-16 14:20FootkerchiefRelationship addedrelated to 0005193
2012-02-16 14:23FootkerchiefTag Detached: Intentional/Expected?

Notes
(0013892)
Footkerchief   
2010-11-15 14:02   
I guess this means my creaky old OS isn't supported anymore, is that right?

XP is definitely supported. Have you tried upgrading to SP3 or at least SP2?
(0013904)
Quietust   
2010-11-15 17:11   
Were you able to run version 0.31.13 on XP SP1?
(0014028)
ManaUser   
2010-11-19 15:01   
Footkerchief, No. (I would have a long time ago if it were that simple.) I'm assuming that's the problem though.

Quietust, no, .12 is apparently the last version that works on my computer.
(0014029)
Quietust   
2010-11-19 15:05   
If 0.31.12 is the last version used on your system, then this is due to Toady switching to Visual C++ 2010. You'll have to upgrade to XP SP2 or later (and you really should do so).
(0014353)
ManaUser   
2010-12-01 16:46   
No, I shouldn't. It's pretty sad that Microsoft has run out of actual improvements to make and stoops to deliberately breaking things to badger people into "upgrading".
(0014354)
twilighdusk   
2010-12-01 17:06   
(edited on: 2010-12-01 19:07)
Don't the service packs fix security loopholes though? The kinds of things hackers exploit to get control of your computer? That's not an improvement?

And it's not so much breaking things so much as feeling it's not worth the effort to make sure something's backwards compatible past a certain extent. After all, it's a very small portion of the userbase that's still using XP SP1, and keeping that small portion happy is not with the extra time and money involved in programing something to make sure it's compatible that far back.

In addition, it's not Microsoft calling the shots on this. It's the choice of the person/company programming a given application how far back to make it compatible. Microsoft doesn't go around breaking knees and forcing programmers to make things incompatible with older systems, the older systems are genuinely different enough that it's not worth the effort to make sure a program is compatible with them.
(0014359)
Logical2u   
2010-12-01 21:49   
This is just a comment, but I don't really want to see a discussion here of all places regarding Microsoft. Would you both (twilighdusk, manauser) consider taking this discussion somewhere else? Thanks.

ManaUser, Quietust has provided a possible explanation for your concerns. Have you had any luck in updating Visual C++ (or generally your C++ libraries) and seeing if that resolves your problem?
(0014361)
Quietust   
2010-12-02 06:25   
Updating C++ libraries on the client system won't do anything at all, since the "problem" is entirely within the executable itself as produced on Toady's system.
(0014445)
Nivm   
2010-12-07 17:45   
The 0.31.12 version also works on Win 2000, which is kinda nice when I don't have access to anything newer. Since no one contradicted Quietust, I assume there's no way for me to get this old system to recognize DF 0.31.18 as a "valid application"?
(0019846)
Footkerchief   
2012-02-16 14:19   
Yeah, you'll have to upgrade.