Which PSDK?

[ivfuser]

I am developing using IVF 8.1 on WinXP, for both Intel and AMD targets (both IA-32 for now). Which Windows PSDK(s) should I be using?

On 1/22/05 in msg 12082, Steve recommended the 'October 2003' build.

On 3/02/05 in msg 12523, Steve recommended PSDK build 1289.

Maybe these are the same?

Also, the release notes and IGS guides I have do not appear to be specific about versions of the PSDK.

Which PSDK(s) should I be using now, and how can make sure I stay current?

Thanks!

[Steven_L_Intel1]

If you are developing for IA-32, you don't need any PSDK - use what comes with MSVC. This is why the guides you are looking at don't refer to a specific PSDK. But if you do want to use one, anything you can find from the last two years should be fine.

If you are developing for EM64T/AMD64, then you need an appropriate PSDK. This has been a moving target, so you can't go by what I said months or even weeks ago. (Or even days, as it happens.) Microsoft finally (on Thursday) made public the "Windows Server 2003 SP1 PSDK" which, while we haven't fully tested it (MS didn't let us see it before they released it), our "touch testing" shows it works ok. (C++ users are more likely to have problems, if any, than Fortran users.)

Note that MS made an incompatible change for EM64T/AMD64 as of PSDK 3790.1289, which required that we change our compilers too. Current 8.1 EM64T compilers are compatible with 1289 and later, and this is very clearly detailed in the release notes.

[ivfuser]

Steve: Thanks for clearing up my misunderstanding. It's good info, since I may need to go EM64T sooner than I thought.

[TimP]

For what it's worth, the current ifort x64 compiler installers don't configure ifort.cfg or ifortvars.bat automatically, when both SDK 1218 and 1289 are present (they have different default installation paths, as well as different names for the architecture). The older SDK has to be removed before ifort installation, or those files have to be edited manually.
The newer SDK should support x87 instructions, which weren't permitted by the older one, which apparently is no longer supported.
We got specific instructions from Microsoft yesterday indicating that C function objects built with Microsoft 64-bit compilers from the SDK are eligible for distribution, but those from the Visual Studio 2005 are not.
As Steve said, expect the Microsoft instructions to change unexpectedly.
The builds run on all tested EM64T, and Opteron server and desktops, but customers have seen illegal instruction faults with AMD 64-bit laptops, which we didn't have available to test.

[Steven_L_Intel1]

We're all hoping that things will settle down now that MS has finally released Windows for x64, but I wouldn't want to bet on it. We had been told by MS that the "RC2" PSDK build 1433 would be "the same as" what was finally released, but it isn't, exactly. As we've wrapped up our 9.0 release, we'll just cross our fingers and hope that nothing breaks. (If it does, we'll certainly try to accomodate it in an update.)

Do be sure you keep current on compilers if you're targeting EM64T, and read the release notes.

[Paul_Curtis]

Steve,

Evidently there are some additional changes to the PSDK which may affect IVF, specifically dropping compatibility with VC++ 6. Take a look at

http://blogs.msdn.com/loripe/archive/2005/05/02/414100.aspx

[Steven_L_Intel1]

That doesn't affect IVF at all, and doesn't affect Intel C++ either, since our compiler does support /GS.