Missing assert.

[sgt/putty] / doc / faq.but

diff --git a/doc/faq.but b/doc/faq.but
index 4c1c309..c794917 100644 (file)
--- a/doc/faq.but
+++ b/doc/faq.but
@@ -161,7 +161,7 @@ completely is the wrong solution and we will not do it.
 
 If you have host keys available in the common \i\c{known_hosts} format,
 we have a script called 
-\W{http://svn.tartarus.org/putty/contrib/kh2reg.py?view=markup}\c{kh2reg.py}
+\W{http://svn.tartarus.org/sgt/putty/contrib/kh2reg.py?view=markup}\c{kh2reg.py}
 to convert them to a Windows .REG file, which can be installed ahead of
 time by double-clicking or using \c{REGEDIT}.
 
@@ -208,15 +208,22 @@ seems to be working so far.
 \S{faq-ports-general}{Question} What ports of PuTTY exist?
 
 Currently, release versions of PuTTY tools only run on full Win32
-systems and Unix. \q{Win32} includes Windows 95, 98, and ME, and it
-includes Windows NT, 2000, XP, and Vista.
+systems and Unix. \q{\i{Win32}} includes versions of Windows from
+Windows 95 onwards (as opposed to the 16-bit Windows 3.1; see
+\k{faq-win31}), up to and including Windows 7; and we know of no
+reason why PuTTY should not continue to work on future versions
+of Windows.
+
+The Windows executables we provide are for the 32-bit \q{\i{x86}}
+processor architecture, but they should work fine on 64-bit
+processors that are backward-compatible with that architecture.
+(We used to also provide executables for Windows for the Alpha
+processor, but stopped after 0.58 due to lack of interest.)
 
 In the development code, partial ports to the Mac OSes exist (see
 \k{faq-mac-port}).
 
-Currently PuTTY does \e{not} run on Windows CE (see \k{faq-wince}),
-and it does not quite run on the Win32s environment under Windows
-3.1 (see \k{faq-win31}).
+Currently PuTTY does \e{not} run on Windows CE (see \k{faq-wince}).
 
 We do not have release-quality ports for any other systems at the
 present time. If anyone told you we had an EPOC port, or an iPaq port,
@@ -1036,6 +1043,23 @@ is triggered by PuTTY 0.58. This was fixed in 0.59. The
 \W{http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/putty/wishlist/xp-wont-run}{\q{xp-wont-run}}
 entry in PuTTY's wishlist has more details.
 
+\S{faq-system32}{Question} When I put PuTTY in
+\cw{C:\\WINDOWS\\\i{SYSTEM32}} on my \i{64-bit Windows} system,
+\i{\q{Duplicate Session}} doesn't work.
+
+The short answer is not to put the PuTTY executables in that location.
+
+On 64-bit systems, \cw{C:\\WINDOWS\\SYSTEM32} is intended to contain
+only 64-bit binaries; Windows' 32-bit binaries live in
+\cw{C:\\WINDOWS\\SYSWOW64}. When a 32-bit program such as PuTTY runs
+on a 64-bit system, it cannot by default see the \q{real}
+\cw{C:\\WINDOWS\\SYSTEM32} at all, because the
+\W{http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa384187(v=vs.85).aspx}{File
+System Redirector} arranges that the running program sees the
+appropriate kind of binaries in \cw{SYSTEM32}. Thus, operations in
+the PuTTY suite that involve it accessing its own executables, such as
+\i{\q{New Session}} and \q{Duplicate Session}, will not work.
+
 \H{faq-secure} Security questions
 
 \S{faq-publicpc}{Question} Is it safe for me to download PuTTY and