SWT 64-bit on Windows

One benefit of the release of standard 64-bit Windows builds of the Eclipse SDK is the possibility to conveniently run SWT applications on that platform.

Most SWT applications are still being packaged for a 32-bit VM. Its quite easy to modify them to run under a 64-bit JVM, here is the recipe which comes with no support or warranty whatsoever.

1. Install the application.
2. Extract swt.jar from the Eclipse.org SWT distribution. e.g. swt-3.4-win32-win32-x86_64 to the application installation directory. Typically you will be looking to overwrite an existing swt.jar instance.
3. Launch the application using a shortcut rather than any provided .exe wrapper. E.g.for the Azureus Bittorrent client, use the following shortcut: javaw.exe -classpath swt.jar;Azureus2.jar org.gudy.azureus2.ui.swt.Main

The Azureus example was originally documented on the Azureus Wiki.

Comments

[xXxOlivierxXx]

Hello¡

I just found your blog, and find really interesting when you say " Its quite easy to modify them to run under a 64-bit JVM", but i havent been able to achieve so.
I developed a java application on netbeans, wich uses the DJNativeSwing webbrowser and swt.jar of 32 bits, but when i try to run that application
on a 64 windows7 system, it shows "Cannot load 32-bit SWT libraries on 64-bit JVM"

I heard you can force the Application to run on 32bits mode by adding -d32 to the code, but dont know where nor how.

Could you give me some tips about how to run my 32bits app on a 64bit Windows 7 os?

Thanks in advance¡

[Chris]

Hi you need a version of the SWT binary compiled for 64 bit windows.

[xXxOlivierxXx]

Thanks a lot for your response¡
I knew this was the issue since a long time ago, but even i tried multiple swt versions none of them worked. I believe my confusion was that i though the "x86_64" .jar version was compatible with both 32 and 64 bits, but i just realized it is just for 64 bits.
Now my application works like a charm under 32 or 64 bits, and thanks to your DjNative swing lib ¡¡¡
Now i have just a minor bug on the WebBrowser class, but nothing to worry about ;)

Regards.