Am Mittwoch, den 17.09.2008, 01:17 +0200 schrieb Peter Dons Tychsen:
Peter, are you sure that windows will handle REG_SZ *only* in the DependOnService case and fail if you have a REG_SZ in DependOnGroup?
No. But i did not want to change the behavior for anything else than the scenario that i had been investigating and testing, to avoid regressions.
I can definitely understand your motivation. The problem is that this patch seems to add unneeded complexity to wine which might cause you problems getting it committed. Experimenting with native windows showed strange results. If I replace the DependOnService entry in my RemoteAccess service entry (it has a REG_MULTI_SZ hat contains just one entry) in the registry by an REG_SZ, services.msc still shows the dependency in the properties dialog. If I replace the DependOnGroup (also a REG_MULTI_SZ with one entry) by a REG_SZ entry, it gets ignored completely by services.msc in the properties dialog.
So, it might be correct to handle the two cases different, as I see different behaviour on native. But this kind of thing should be tested (at least manually as I did) and documented (perhaps in your commit message) that the different loading behaviour for DependOnService and DependOnGroup is verified. Just for reference: WinXP SP3 in KVM here.
Regards, Michael Karcher