0.85: Wrong "bitness" of BPGDEC.exe on 32bit version

Reported bugs that have been closed and/or resolved

Moderators: XnTriq, helmut, xnview, Dreamer

Post Reply
captaincavern
Posts: 44
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2013 6:31 am

0.85: Wrong "bitness" of BPGDEC.exe on 32bit version

Post by captaincavern »

In 32bit version, BPGDEC.exe and dependencies are 64bit. Same with latest version of XnConvert.
User avatar
helmut
Posts: 8705
Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2003 6:47 pm
Location: Frankfurt, Germany

Re: 0.85: Wrong "bitness" of BPGDEC.exe on 32bit version

Post by helmut »

captaincavern wrote:In 32bit version, BPGDEC.exe and dependencies are 64bit. Same with latest version of XnConvert.
Ouch, that is serious. I guess Pierre will provide a new 0.85 32bit very soon.
User avatar
helmut
Posts: 8705
Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2003 6:47 pm
Location: Frankfurt, Germany

Re: 0.85: Wrong "bitness" of BPGDEC.exe on 32bit version

Post by helmut »

@Pierre: I'm not very familiar with "bitness". Is this a serious problem or not so serious? What are the consequences of the wrong bitness?
cday
XnThusiast
Posts: 3979
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2012 9:45 am
Location: Cheltenham, U.K.

Re: 0.85: Wrong "bitness" of BPGDEC.exe on 32bit version

Post by cday »

Normally 32-bit software can only interface with 32-bit software, and 64-bit software can only interface with 64-bit applications.

A common example is that 64-bit XnView software versions require 64-bit Ghostscript, and 32-bit versions require 32-bit Ghostscript, but as far as I know the same is true for plug-ins and other software in general, so that many file formats that require plug-ins are currently only supported in 32-bit XnView software, as 64-bit versions of the plug-in required are not available.

Another example was access to TWAIN scanning from XnView MP 64-bit, which wasn't available until recently as the 64-bit utilities the interface required weren't normally available: the solution was ultimately for Pierre to create special 'bridge' software so that the 32-bit versions could be used.

"Bitness" was a new term to me, although self-explanatory, but Googling it, it evidently does exist: bitness and has been used by Microsoft.
helmut wrote:@Pierre: I'm very not familiar with "bitness". Is this a serious problem or not so serious? What are the consequences of the wrong bitness?
If anything I've written is incorrect, please correct me... :wink:
User avatar
xnview
Author of XnView
Posts: 43483
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2003 7:31 am
Location: France
Contact:

Re: 0.85: Wrong "bitness" of BPGDEC.exe on 32bit version

Post by xnview »

The 0.85 software package was updated. It should be correct, now.
Pierre.
User avatar
helmut
Posts: 8705
Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2003 6:47 pm
Location: Frankfurt, Germany

Re: 0.85: Wrong "bitness" of BPGDEC.exe on 32bit version

Post by helmut »

xnview wrote:The 0.85 software package was updated. It should be correct, now.
Good to read that this was fixed.

@cday: Thank you for your explanation on "bitness". This helps to understand things better. :)
Post Reply