> You can build and link using banned API's , but when you run the app
> certification kit , it will give you a fail, and list of all the
> function calls you making that you can't make. If you use the .dll's ,
> its even worse because it fail you for functions that your not using
> but because tha
>>> I've been porting openssl to run on winrt(metro).
>> What does it mean more specifically? Even though some assert that WinRT
>> is totally independent framework directly on top of NT Kernel Services,
>> it doesn't seem to hold true. The only things that prevents WinRT
>> programmer from calling
You can build and link using banned API's , but when you run the app
certification kit , it will give you a fail, and list of all the
function calls you making that you can't make. If you use the .dll's ,
its even worse because it fail you for functions that your not using
but because that dll is i
> -Original Message-
> From: owner-openssl-...@openssl.org [mailto:owner-openssl-
> d...@openssl.org] On Behalf Of Andy Polyakov
> Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 4:52 PM
> To: openssl-dev@openssl.org
> Subject: Re: winrt random
>
> > I've been porti
For example, you *can* call MessageBox from Metro application if
you declare it yourself and explicitly link with user32.lib. It makes
lesser sense to do so, because you have to switch to desktop in order to
interact with dialog, but it *is* possible.
Just to clarify. I'm not suggesting to kee
I've been porting openssl to run on winrt(metro).
What does it mean more specifically? Even though some assert that WinRT
is totally independent framework directly on top of NT Kernel Services,
it doesn't seem to hold true. The only things that prevents WinRT
programmer from calling any parti
