Intel does "AMD64" drivers

[George Macdonald]

It's right there in the .INF file dated 11/27/2004:

__________________________________________
; Intel 8255x-based PCI Ethernet Adapters
; PnP install script for Windows XP
;
; Version 8.0.15

[Version]
Signature = "$Windows NT$"
Class = Net
ClassGUID = {4d36e972-e325-11ce-bfc1-08002be10318}
Provider = %V_INTEL%
CatalogFile = e100b325.cat
DriverVer = 10/14/2004,8.0.15.0

[Manufacturer]
%V_INTEL% = Intel, NTx86, NTIA64, NTAMD64
..
..
___________________________________________

This is a WHQL ratified .INF file so does this mean that the EM64T versions
are not err, certified yet? Hmmm.

--
Rgds, George Macdonald

[Yousuf Khan]

George Macdonald wrote: It's right there in the .INF file dated 11/27/2004: __________________________________________ ; Intel 8255x-based PCI Ethernet Adapters ; PnP install script for Windows XP ; ; Version 8.0.15 [Version] Signature = "$Windows NT$" Class = Net ClassGUID = {4d36e972-e325-11ce-bfc1-08002be10318} Provider = %V_INTEL% CatalogFile = e100b325.cat DriverVer = 10/14/2004,8.0.15.0 [Manufacturer] %V_INTEL% = Intel, NTx86, NTIA64, NTAMD64 .. .. ___________________________________________ This is a WHQL ratified .INF file so does this mean that the EM64T versions are not err, certified yet? Hmmm.

I think Microsoft's programming headers all refer to x64 as AMD64, since
that was the first one out.

Yousuf Khan

[George Macdonald]

On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 15:21:45 -0500, Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@ezrs.com> wrote:
George Macdonald wrote: It's right there in the .INF file dated 11/27/2004: __________________________________________ ; Intel 8255x-based PCI Ethernet Adapters ; PnP install script for Windows XP ; ; Version 8.0.15 [Version] Signature = "$Windows NT$" Class = Net ClassGUID = {4d36e972-e325-11ce-bfc1-08002be10318} Provider = %V_INTEL% CatalogFile = e100b325.cat DriverVer = 10/14/2004,8.0.15.0 [Manufacturer] %V_INTEL% = Intel, NTx86, NTIA64, NTAMD64 .. .. ___________________________________________ This is a WHQL ratified .INF file so does this mean that the EM64T versions are not err, certified yet? Hmmm.I think Microsoft's programming headers all refer to x64 as AMD64, sincethat was the first one out.

I'm no expert on .INF files but are you saying that the NTAMD64 is keyed to
M$ dictated fields for the driver install? This is an Intel-supplied file.
I got the impression that it was just a comment field here. Either way I
wouldn't think Intel would be "pleased".

--
Rgds, George Macdonald

[Yousuf Khan]

George Macdonald wrote:I think Microsoft's programming headers all refer to x64 as AMD64, sincethat was the first one out. I'm no expert on .INF files but are you saying that the NTAMD64 is keyed to M$ dictated fields for the driver install? This is an Intel-supplied file. I got the impression that it was just a comment field here. Either way I wouldn't think Intel would be "pleased".

Intel-supplied or not, the platform identifications are all based around
what Microsoft wants to call them (it's their operating system after
all). And I don't think it's really just a comment, it's probably being
used for something. If it is a comment, then likely it's one of those
"commented out" programmatic lines -- something that may have been used
in the past, or something that maybe used in the future, but currently
unused.

As for whether Intel will be pleased or not, who reads .INF files?

Yousuf Khan

[George Macdonald]

On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 14:11:16 -0500, Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@ezrs.com> wrote:
George Macdonald wrote:I think Microsoft's programming headers all refer to x64 as AMD64, sincethat was the first one out. I'm no expert on .INF files but are you saying that the NTAMD64 is keyed to M$ dictated fields for the driver install? This is an Intel-supplied file. I got the impression that it was just a comment field here. Either way I wouldn't think Intel would be "pleased".Intel-supplied or not, the platform identifications are all based aroundwhat Microsoft wants to call them (it's their operating system afterall). And I don't think it's really just a comment, it's probably beingused for something. If it is a comment, then likely it's one of those"commented out" programmatic lines -- something that may have been usedin the past, or something that maybe used in the future, but currentlyunused.

Oh... "probably"?:-)
As for whether Intel will be pleased or not, who reads .INF files?

..INF entries end up in the registry and I've had occasion to look through
many during installation of drivers etc.

--
Rgds, George Macdonald