Am 07.03.2015 um 20:04 schrieb Colin Finck:
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 ;-))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?
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.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?
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
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ Ros-dev mailing list Ros-dev@reactos.org http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
