3 ms·
I can see the benefits in terms of security but not in terms of space. So what if the application folder uses half a gig more, if I never have to use installers
by DeepDuh 14y ago
I can see the benefits in terms of security but not in terms of space. So what if the application folder uses half a gig more, if I never have to use installers for most applications.
And as far as your example goes: From what I understand most Windows developers just use a fixed library version number to specify what dll to use. When that happens, security updates won't do any good either. IMO as long as APIs can be changed in between library versions, developers will always be responsible themselves to upgrade to the newest libraries. It's a nice idea but it just doesn't reflect the reality in the world of Business application where incompatibility directly result in monetary losses.
- option_greek 14y ago"So what if the application folder uses half a gig more, if I never have to use installers for most applications." Sure, but a gig more for RAM would make a lot of difference. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic-link_library#Memory_management http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic-link_library#Memory_man...
- cooldeal 14y agoIt looks like you don't know how manifests and SxS works. You can mark the DLL compatible while bumping the version number for security upgrades. The comments in this thread(from my OP) is a good start if you want to learn. http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3079259&cid=41164967 http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3079259&cid=41...