Re: [ros-dev] ReactOS versioning

[Alex Ionescu]

Not sure if that actually happens, but I meant that
c:\windows\system32\comctl32.dll is the original, while
c:\windows\winsxs\comctl32-latest-version.dll\comctl32.dll is a symlink.

Best regards,
Alex Ionescu

On Sun, Mar 8, 2015 at 4:50 PM, Giannis Adamopoulos <
giannis.adamopoulos(a)reactos.org&gt; wrote:

>   You mean multiple versions of the same dll are in fact
> just one dll in
>  some cases?
>
>  ReactOS Development List &lt;ros-dev(a)reactos.org&gt; wrote on Sun, March 8th,
>  2015, 9:50 AM:
> >   ActCtx or "Fusion" is part of WinSxS
> > yes, and activation contexts can be
> >  built from manifest files, registry, app compat, so we don't have to
> >  necessarily use the "Winxs" part which is manifest-only, but rather
> >  leverage the actual "Fusion" backend.
> >
> >  FYI, a lot of people don't know this, but those 14000 folders/files in
> >  WinSxS are actually sym (or hard?) links. Explorer shows you that the
> >  folder is xx GB but in fact it's tiny --  most of those DLLs are symlinks
> >  to the real ones in system32.
> >
> >  Best regards,
> >  Alex Ionescu
> >
> >  On Sat, Mar 7, 2015 at 9:51 PM, David Quintana (gigaherz) <
> >  gigaherz(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
> >
> >  > Hmm I may be completely mistaken but doesn''t Windows use the ActCtx 
> stuff
> >   > for compatibility profiles? Wouldn't we
> > be able to use
> >  > "forward-compatibility" profiles? If that's right, it may be the
>  cleanest
> >   > system for it.
> >  >
> >  > On 7 March 2015 at 22:38, Jerome Gardou &lt;jerome.gardou(a)reactos.org&gt; 
> wrote:
> >   >
> >  >>
> >  >>
> >  >> Le 07/03/2015 22:21, Timo Kreuzer a écrit :
> >  >>
> >  >> Am 07.03.2015 um 20:04 schrieb Colin Finck:
> >  >>
> >  >> Am 07.03.2015 um 13:44 schrieb Timo Kreuzer:
> >  >>
> >  >> The file system
> >  >> redirection would redirect system32 into merged folders, containing 
>  the
> >   >> version specific DLLs, while everything
> > that is not existing in this
> >  >> folder will be taken from the original system32. Potential naming
> >  >> scheme: system32.601 system32.602, etc.
> >  >>
> >  >> Isn't that the same problem WinSxS tries to solve? Do we really need 
> to
> >   >> introduce another folder scheme for
> > multiple DLL versions here?
> >  >>
> >  >> AFAIK SxS only works with manifests, not with registry configuration
> >  >> (correct me if I'm wrong), so we'd probably need a modified solution
>  here
> >   >> anyway. And have you ever had a look
> > into your Windows/winsxs folder? 
>  DLL
> >   >> hell 2.0! My winsxs folder on Win7
> > contains > 14.000 subfolders. (ok, 
>  one
> >   >> might take that as an argument, that
> > another few hundred or thousand
> >  >> wouldn't hurt so much ;-))
> >  >>
> >  >> You're not wrong, but we could store the manifest into the registry. 
> With
> >   >> a nice config tool, that would be
> > completely transparent to the user.
> >  >>
> >  >>
> >  >>
> >  >> Okay, SxS manages one DLL per folder while your idea is to have 
>  folders
> >   >> with multiple DLLs of the same version.
> > But if we do file system
> >  >> redirection anyway, this should be solvable. Or am I missing something
> >  >> here?
> >  >>
> >  >> I don't see the relationship between FS redirection and SxS. If we do 
> the
> >   >> former, we don't need the latter. In
> > fact FS redirection wouldn't 
>  work very
> >   >> well in an environment, where each DLL
> > lives in it's own folder.
> >  >>
> >  >>
> >  >> We need full SxS support anyway, so why not make use of it for this
> >  >> task as well?
> >  >>
> >  >>
> >  >> I just think that a wow64 like FS redirection might be the cleanest 
>  and
> >   >> easiest approach. We are not going to
> > handle all kinds of different 
>  DLL
> >   >> versions in all kinds of mixes, just a
> > relatively small set of major 
>  OS
> >   >> versions. And each of them with a pretty
> > consistent set of DLLs.
> >  >> But that doesn't mean that I would rule out sxs. If we can easily 
> provide
> >   >> an sxs solution, that doesn't result
> > in a huge mess, we can go that 
>  way.
> >   >>
> >  >> Timo
> >  >>
> >  >>
> >  >>
> >  >>
> >  >> _______________________________________________
> >  >> Ros-dev mailing [e-mail]:// 
> www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
> > > >  
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >  _______________________________________________
> > > >  Ros-dev mailing list
> > > >  Ros-dev(a)reactos.org
> > > >  http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
> > > >  
> > >
> > >  _______________________________________________
> > >  Ros-dev mailing list
> > >  Ros-dev(a)reactos.org
> > >  http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
> > >
> > >  
> >  _______________________________________________
> >  Ros-dev mailing list
> >  Ros-dev(a)reactos.org
> >  http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev 
>  _______________________________________________
>  Ros-dev mailing list
>  Ros-dev(a)reactos.org
>  http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
>