On 24 Mar 2005 19:39:59 +0100, Alexandre Julliard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> load_registry already has the subkey name. The fact that the key is
> also created on the client side is just a temporary hack that can be
> removed.
>
Ah, excellent. A slight overlook on my part, but now the puzzle
p
James Hawkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> There are a couple reasons why I chose to add a new request instead of
> use load_registry. mount_key was written with the restriction that a
> key can only be loaded under HKLM or HKU, while load_registry
> (internally) loads a key anywhere. While loa
On 24 Mar 2005 13:35:35 +0100, Alexandre Julliard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> James Hawkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > This implementation passes the registry tests. A new server function
> > is added, mount_key. mount_key is similar to load_registry except
> > that mount_key can only lo
James Hawkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This implementation passes the registry tests. A new server function
> is added, mount_key. mount_key is similar to load_registry except
> that mount_key can only load a key under HKLM or HKU and the key is
> created inside mount_key. To use load_regi
