On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 4:50 AM, Dan Kegel <dank@kegel.com> wrote:
On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 2:36 AM, Alexandre Julliard <julliard@winehq.org> wrote:Well, that's easier :-)
> You certainly don't want to call through explorer for that, showing a
> message box directly is fine.
Yeah, I guess some apps tolerate missing DLLs by loading them manually.
> You have to be careful to only do it when
> loading the main exe, not for any random dll load
We'll miss a few problems (e.g. apps that delay-load but can't handle
the missing dll) but that's ok.
right, and just not call MessageBox.
> also you have to properly handle the case of a missing X display
Hmm, ideally we would send them to a web page that gave
information tailored to the dll in question, but a MessageBox is
good enough for 1.0.