On Tue, 29 Apr 2008, Peter Beutner wrote:
Steven Edwards schrieb:
On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 3:51 AM, Steven Edwards winehacker@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 9:19 AM, Dan Kegel dank@kegel.com wrote:
- You never clear that environment variable... what happens
when an app just tests for the existence of a DLL by trying to load it? We don't want to print an error then. (That's why I originally suggested clearing the env var after the app finished loading. That's still broken -- it won't catch errors in helper exes -- but it's better than nothing.)
I assume you mean if the application is just checking manually for the dll via GetModuleHandle or LoadLibrary? I'll write a test case for this to see if it causes a problem. My assumption was that the failure case for that was at a higher level but I'll check with a test case. I don't think we need to clear the variable....what I mean is I wonder if there is a way to set the variable to be inherited by all child processes launched by start.exe.so in unix mode. I'll look in to this as well.
I assumed the code path must be different so I wrote a test app that tried to do a GetProcAddress or LoadLibrary on a non-existent dll and was right, It did not throw the messagebox.
But I think it will still trigger the msg box if the application is checking for an existent foo.dll via LoadLibrary and foo.dll depends on a missing xyz.dll. It won't trigger if you clear the environment variable as Dan said. I'm not sure though which way is the right one here.
Windows doesn't do that - when my application tries to load a module that links against a missing DLL then LoadLibrary simply fails without showing any message. The "ignore it if LoadLibrary fails" logic is common in many programs that use optional plugins.
Paul Chitescu