Re: [UPDATE] [programs/uninstaller] Check HKCU for uninstall entries too

[James Hawkins]

On 4/19/07, Tom Spear  wrote:
> Apparently the last patch had multiple patches in the file because I
> didnt delete it before creating the new one..
>
> So here we go again.
>
> Check HKCU as well as HKLM for uninstall entries, using a for loop

@@ -69,7 +69,7 @@
 /**
  * Used to output program list when used with --list
  */
-static void ListUninstallPrograms(void)
+static void ListUninstallPrograms()

The parameter list was correct as is.  If a function takes no
parameters, the correct list is 'void'.  Don't change parts of the
code that don't have to do with your patch, especially when you don't
know what you're changing.

if (i < numentries)
-        UninstallProgram();
+        for (x=0; x<2; x++)
+            UninstallProgram(rootkey);

Why are you calling UninstallProgram twice with the same key?  Besides
that, using magic numbers (2) is bad coding.

+    HKEY keys[2];
+    keys[0] = HKEY_CURRENT_USER;
+    keys[1] = HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE;

HKEY keys[] = { HKEY_CURRENT_USER, HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE };

+	for (x=0; x<2; x++)

You're hardcoding this value to 2, which is another bad magic number.
What if, hypothetically, more root keys are added to the list?

for (x = 0; x < sizeof(keys); x++)

+    rootkey[0] = HKEY_CURRENT_USER;
+    rootkey[1] = HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE;

Same thing as above.

+        sizeOfSubKeyName = 255;

What is 255?

+    HKEY rootkey[2];
+    rootkey[0] = HKEY_CURRENT_USER;
+    rootkey[1] = HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE;

Same.

+                        /* FIXME: UninstallProgram should figure out
which root key to uninstall
+                         * from, as opposed to just going with the
first value in rootkey.  The
+                         * entry gets removed this way as well, but
it is not apparent by this code.
+                         */
+                        UninstallProgram(*rootkey);

What is the point of adding rootkey if you're not going to use it?
UninstallProgram(HKEY_X) is a lot shorter.  The point is, don't add
something until you're going to use it.  On top of that, this new code
is basically UninstallProgram(HKEY_CURRENT_USER) when the original
code was (parameter added for convenience)
UninstallProgram(HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE).  That's not right.

[UPDATE] [programs/uninstaller] Check HKCU for uninstall entries too

[Tom Spear]

Try applying the patch before you comment on it.  See below..

On 4/19/07, James Hawkins  wrote:
> On 4/19/07, Tom Spear  wrote:
> > Apparently the last patch had multiple patches in the file because I
> > didnt delete it before creating the new one..
> >
> > So here we go again.
> >
> > Check HKCU as well as HKLM for uninstall entries, using a for loop
>
> @@ -69,7 +69,7 @@
>  /**
> - Used to output program list when used with --list
>
> */
> -static void ListUninstallPrograms(void)
> +static void ListUninstallPrograms()
>
> The parameter list was correct as is.  If a function takes no
> parameters, the correct list is 'void'.  Don't change parts of the
> code that don't have to do with your patch, especially when you don't
> know what you're changing.

That one was an oops, I'll change it back...
>  if (i < numentries)
> -
>    UninstallProgram();
> -
>    for (x=0; x<2; x++)
> -
>        UninstallProgram(rootkey);
>
> Why are you calling UninstallProgram twice with the same key?  Besides
> that, using magic numbers (2) is bad coding.

That is another oops.  I should have double checked this as well.  The
use of the 'magic number' in this case is that there will never be
more than 2 keys (EVER) to check.  However I will make a constant
array instead and check x against the number of values in this array
instead.
> - HKEY keys[2];
> - keys[0] = HKEY_CURRENT_USER;
> - keys[1] = HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE;
>
> HKEY keys[] = { HKEY_CURRENT_USER, HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE };
> -
>   for (x=0; x<2; x++)
>
> You're hardcoding this value to 2, which is another bad magic number.
> What if, hypothetically, more root keys are added to the list?

see above
> for (x = 0; x < sizeof(keys); x++)
> - rootkey[0] = HKEY_CURRENT_USER;
> - rootkey[1] = HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE;
>
> Same thing as above.

see above
> -
>    sizeOfSubKeyName = 255;
>
> What is 255?

I dont know, but if you look at the file (pre patch) that is already
there, diff just deletes and readds it because it moved further down
in the file.  However, to answer your question, I checked the MS
website:

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/256986

<quote>
The maximum size of a key name is 255 characters.

The following table lists the data types that are currently defined
and that are used by Windows. The maximum size of a value name is as
follows:
•	Windows Server 2003 and Windows XP: 16,383 characters
•	Windows 2000: 260 ANSI characters or 16,383 Unicode characters
•	Windows Millennium Edition/Windows 98/Windows 95: 255 characters
</quote>
> - HKEY rootkey[2];
> - rootkey[0] = HKEY_CURRENT_USER;
> - rootkey[1] = HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE;
>
> Same.

same
> -
>                    /* FIXME: UninstallProgram should figure out
>
> which root key to uninstall
> -
>                     * from, as opposed to just going with the
>
> first value in rootkey.  The
> -
>                     * entry gets removed this way as well, but
>
> it is not apparent by this code.
> -
>                     */
> -
>                    UninstallProgram(*rootkey);
>
> What is the point of adding rootkey if you're not going to use it?
> UninstallProgram(HKEY_X) is a lot shorter.  The point is, don't add
> something until you're going to use it.  On top of that, this new code
> is basically UninstallProgram(HKEY_CURRENT_USER) when the original
> code was (parameter added for convenience)
> UninstallProgram(HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE).  That's not right.

Well, unfortunately there isnt a way to call UninstallProgram without
a parameter if it is declared that way.  So I could either hardcode it
to HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE, since it requires a parameter now, or I could
leave it as *rootkey to be fixed later.  I tried to find a way to for
loop it, but because it is inside DlgProc, I get an error when
compiling.  So I left it alone..  As the comment says, the code works
as is, but it is not apparent by the code.  If someone has a
suggestion on how to get that specific line of code to look proper (so
you can tell if it is doing UninstallProgram on HKLM or HKCU, please
feel free..

The reason we need the parameter added to UninstallProgram is because of:

/* delete the application's uninstall entry */
RegOpenKeyExW(HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE, PathUninstallW, 0, KEY_READ, &hkeyUninst);

being in the original file.  I think it's better to have whichever
root key is being used passed to the RegOpenKeyExW.....

To be honest I was more worried about someone not liking my use of the
for loop in FetchUninstallInformation...
> --
> James Hawkins

[UPDATE] [programs/uninstaller] Check HKCU for uninstall entries too

[James Hawkins]

On 4/19/07, Tom Spear  wrote:
> Try applying the patch before you comment on it.  See below..

I read all your reply comments, and nothing you said leads me to
believe that I need to apply this patch to review it.
> On 4/19/07, James Hawkins  wrote:
> > On 4/19/07, Tom Spear  wrote:
> > > Apparently the last patch had multiple patches in the file because I
> > > didnt delete it before creating the new one..
> > >
> > > So here we go again.
> > >
> > > Check HKCU as well as HKLM for uninstall entries, using a for loop
> >
> > @@ -69,7 +69,7 @@
> >  /**
> > - Used to output program list when used with --list
> >
> > */
> > -static void ListUninstallPrograms(void)
> > +static void ListUninstallPrograms()
> >
> > The parameter list was correct as is.  If a function takes no
> > parameters, the correct list is 'void'.  Don't change parts of the
> > code that don't have to do with your patch, especially when you don't
> > know what you're changing.
>
> That one was an oops, I'll change it back...
> >  if (i < numentries)
> > -
> >    UninstallProgram();
> > -
> >    for (x=0; x<2; x++)
> > -
> >        UninstallProgram(rootkey);
> >
> > Why are you calling UninstallProgram twice with the same key?  Besides
> > that, using magic numbers (2) is bad coding.
>
> That is another oops.  I should have double checked this as well.  The
> use of the 'magic number' in this case is that there will never be
> more than 2 keys (EVER) to check.  However I will make a constant
> array instead and check x against the number of values in this array
> instead.

Engineers at a certain software company decided that machines would
not have more than 640k of RAM anytime soon, leading to at least a
decade of headaches for developers.  Case in point, putting
self-imposed limits in your code is a bad design habit.
> > - HKEY keys[2];
> > - keys[0] = HKEY_CURRENT_USER;
> > - keys[1] = HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE;
> >
> > HKEY keys[] = { HKEY_CURRENT_USER, HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE };
> > -
> >   for (x=0; x<2; x++)
> >
> > You're hardcoding this value to 2, which is another bad magic number.
> > What if, hypothetically, more root keys are added to the list?
>
> see above
> > for (x = 0; x < sizeof(keys); x++)
> > - rootkey[0] = HKEY_CURRENT_USER;
> > - rootkey[1] = HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE;
> >
> > Same thing as above.
>
> see above
> > -
> >    sizeOfSubKeyName = 255;
> >
> > What is 255?
>
> I dont know, but if you look at the file (pre patch) that is already
> there, diff just deletes and readds it because it moved further down
> in the file.  However, to answer your question, I checked the MS
> website:

The old code is clearly in the patch, and no one implied that you
wrote it.  The comment still stands though.  The 255 needs to be
replaced with a const or define that clarifies what the value
represents.
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/256986
>
> <quote>
> The maximum size of a key name is 255 characters.
>
> The following table lists the data types that are currently defined
> and that are used by Windows. The maximum size of a value name is as
> follows:
> •       Windows Server 2003 and Windows XP: 16,383 characters
> •       Windows 2000: 260 ANSI characters or 16,383 Unicode characters
> •       Windows Millennium Edition/Windows 98/Windows 95: 255 characters
>
> </quote>
> > - HKEY rootkey[2];
> > - rootkey[0] = HKEY_CURRENT_USER;
> > - rootkey[1] = HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE;
> >
> > Same.
>
> same
> > -
> >                    /* FIXME: UninstallProgram should figure out
> >
> > which root key to uninstall
> > -
> >                     * from, as opposed to just going with the
> >
> > first value in rootkey.  The
> > -
> >                     * entry gets removed this way as well, but
> >
> > it is not apparent by this code.
> > -
> >                     */
> > -
> >                    UninstallProgram(*rootkey);
> >
> > What is the point of adding rootkey if you're not going to use it?
> > UninstallProgram(HKEY_X) is a lot shorter.  The point is, don't add
> > something until you're going to use it.  On top of that, this new code
> > is basically UninstallProgram(HKEY_CURRENT_USER) when the original
> > code was (parameter added for convenience)
> > UninstallProgram(HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE).  That's not right.
>
> Well, unfortunately there isnt a way to call UninstallProgram without
> a parameter if it is declared that way.

Please reread my comment.  rootkey is superfluous, not the parameter
to UninstallProgram.
> So I could either hardcode it
> to HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE, since it requires a parameter now, or I could
> leave it as *rootkey to be fixed later.

Since rootkey shouldn't be in the patch (should only be added when
it's used), the only option remaining is to call
UninstallProgram(HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE).
> I tried to find a way to for
> loop it, but because it is inside DlgProc, I get an error when
> compiling.  So I left it alone..  As the comment says, the code works
> as is, but it is not apparent by the code.  If someone has a
> suggestion on how to get that specific line of code to look proper (so
> you can tell if it is doing UninstallProgram on HKLM or HKCU, please
> feel free..
>
> The reason we need the parameter added to UninstallProgram is because of:
>
> /* delete the application's uninstall entry */
> RegOpenKeyExW(HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE, PathUninstallW, 0, KEY_READ, &hkeyUninst);
>
> being in the original file.  I think it's better to have whichever
> root key is being used passed to the RegOpenKeyExW.....

I never had any objections with the new parameter to UninstallProgram.

[UPDATE] [programs/uninstaller] Check HKCU for uninstall entries too

[Tom Spear]

I rewrote the patch based on your suggestions, and I'm having a little
difficulty with certain things.  I did a little more testing, and it
turns out that the uninstaller I was using removes the local machine
uninstall entry on its own.  So I started futzing with the code some
to try to figure a way to get the root key to be properly passed to
UninstallProgram.  The only thing I can come up with is some form of
using entries[sel].key.  I can only test at work though, so I have no
way of knowing until tomorrow if that would even work.  However,
assuming that it will, is there a way to strip PathUninstallW from
entries[sel].key so that the only thing left is the root key?  If so
then I can probably use something along the lines of (pseudocode):

root_key = strip(entries[sel].key, PathUninstallW);
UninstallProgram(root_key);

Thanks for the help

Tom

On 4/19/07, James Hawkins  wrote:
> On 4/19/07, Tom Spear  wrote:
> > Try applying the patch before you comment on it.  See below..
>
> I read all your reply comments, and nothing you said leads me to
> believe that I need to apply this patch to review it.
> > On 4/19/07, James Hawkins  wrote:
> > > On 4/19/07, Tom Spear  wrote:
> > > > Apparently the last patch had multiple patches in the file because I
> > > > didnt delete it before creating the new one..
> > > >
> > > > So here we go again.
> > > >
> > > > Check HKCU as well as HKLM for uninstall entries, using a for loop
> > >
> > > @@ -69,7 +69,7 @@
> > >  /**
> > > - Used to output program list when used with --list
> > >
> > > */
> > > -static void ListUninstallPrograms(void)
> > > +static void ListUninstallPrograms()
> > >
> > > The parameter list was correct as is.  If a function takes no
> > > parameters, the correct list is 'void'.  Don't change parts of the
> > > code that don't have to do with your patch, especially when you don't
> > > know what you're changing.
> >
> > That one was an oops, I'll change it back...
> > >  if (i < numentries)
> > > -
> > >    UninstallProgram();
> > > -
> > >    for (x=0; x<2; x++)
> > > -
> > >        UninstallProgram(rootkey);
> > >
> > > Why are you calling UninstallProgram twice with the same key?  Besides
> > > that, using magic numbers (2) is bad coding.
> >
> > That is another oops.  I should have double checked this as well.  The
> > use of the 'magic number' in this case is that there will never be
> > more than 2 keys (EVER) to check.  However I will make a constant
> > array instead and check x against the number of values in this array
> > instead.
>
> Engineers at a certain software company decided that machines would
> not have more than 640k of RAM anytime soon, leading to at least a
> decade of headaches for developers.  Case in point, putting
> self-imposed limits in your code is a bad design habit.
> > > - HKEY keys[2];
> > > - keys[0] = HKEY_CURRENT_USER;
> > > - keys[1] = HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE;
> > >
> > > HKEY keys[] = { HKEY_CURRENT_USER, HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE };
> > > -
> > >   for (x=0; x<2; x++)
> > >
> > > You're hardcoding this value to 2, which is another bad magic number.
> > > What if, hypothetically, more root keys are added to the list?
> >
> > see above
> > > for (x = 0; x < sizeof(keys); x++)
> > > - rootkey[0] = HKEY_CURRENT_USER;
> > > - rootkey[1] = HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE;
> > >
> > > Same thing as above.
> >
> > see above
> > > -
> > >    sizeOfSubKeyName = 255;
> > >
> > > What is 255?
> >
> > I dont know, but if you look at the file (pre patch) that is already
> > there, diff just deletes and readds it because it moved further down
> > in the file.  However, to answer your question, I checked the MS
> > website:
>
> The old code is clearly in the patch, and no one implied that you
> wrote it.  The comment still stands though.  The 255 needs to be
> replaced with a const or define that clarifies what the value
> represents.
> > http://support.microsoft.com/kb/256986
> >
> > <quote>
> > The maximum size of a key name is 255 characters.
> >
> > The following table lists the data types that are currently defined
> > and that are used by Windows. The maximum size of a value name is as
> > follows:
> > •       Windows Server 2003 and Windows XP: 16,383 characters
> > •       Windows 2000: 260 ANSI characters or 16,383 Unicode characters
> > •       Windows Millennium Edition/Windows 98/Windows 95: 255 characters
> >
> > </quote>
> > > - HKEY rootkey[2];
> > > - rootkey[0] = HKEY_CURRENT_USER;
> > > - rootkey[1] = HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE;
> > >
> > > Same.
> >
> > same
> > > -
> > >                    /* FIXME: UninstallProgram should figure out
> > >
> > > which root key to uninstall
> > > -
> > >                     * from, as opposed to just going with the
> > >
> > > first value in rootkey.  The
> > > -
> > >                     * entry gets removed this way as well, but
> > >
> > > it is not apparent by this code.
> > > -
> > >                     */
> > > -
> > >                    UninstallProgram(*rootkey);
> > >
> > > What is the point of adding rootkey if you're not going to use it?
> > > UninstallProgram(HKEY_X) is a lot shorter.  The point is, don't add
> > > something until you're going to use it.  On top of that, this new code
> > > is basically UninstallProgram(HKEY_CURRENT_USER) when the original
> > > code was (parameter added for convenience)
> > > UninstallProgram(HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE).  That's not right.
> >
> > Well, unfortunately there isnt a way to call UninstallProgram without
> > a parameter if it is declared that way.
>
> Please reread my comment.  rootkey is superfluous, not the parameter
> to UninstallProgram.
> > So I could either hardcode it
> > to HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE, since it requires a parameter now, or I could
> > leave it as *rootkey to be fixed later.
>
> Since rootkey shouldn't be in the patch (should only be added when
> it's used), the only option remaining is to call
> UninstallProgram(HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE).
> > I tried to find a way to for
> > loop it, but because it is inside DlgProc, I get an error when
> > compiling.  So I left it alone..  As the comment says, the code works
> > as is, but it is not apparent by the code.  If someone has a
> > suggestion on how to get that specific line of code to look proper (so
> > you can tell if it is doing UninstallProgram on HKLM or HKCU, please
> > feel free..
> >
> > The reason we need the parameter added to UninstallProgram is because of:
> >
> > /* delete the application's uninstall entry */
> > RegOpenKeyExW(HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE, PathUninstallW, 0, KEY_READ, &hkeyUninst);
> >
> > being in the original file.  I think it's better to have whichever
> > root key is being used passed to the RegOpenKeyExW.....
>
> I never had any objections with the new parameter to UninstallProgram.
>
> --
> James Hawkins

[UPDATE] [programs/uninstaller] Check HKCU for uninstall entries too

[Tom Spear]

Well, I finally solved all of my issues with my patch (yay!).  It will
be ready to submit to wine-patches as soon as I reinstall wine to
finish up my testing..  Something borked it and now it won't run even
winecfg...  Go figure.  So anyways, with any luck, my testing will go
without a hitch, and I can get my first patch ever done in C for the
wine project committed.  Wish me luck.

Tom

On 4/19/07, Tom Spear  wrote:
> I rewrote the patch based on your suggestions, and I'm having a little
> difficulty with certain things.  I did a little more testing, and it
> turns out that the uninstaller I was using removes the local machine
> uninstall entry on its own.  So I started futzing with the code some
> to try to figure a way to get the root key to be properly passed to
> UninstallProgram.  The only thing I can come up with is some form of
> using entries[sel].key.  I can only test at work though, so I have no
> way of knowing until tomorrow if that would even work.  However,
> assuming that it will, is there a way to strip PathUninstallW from
> entries[sel].key so that the only thing left is the root key?  If so
> then I can probably use something along the lines of (pseudocode):
>
> root_key = strip(entries[sel].key, PathUninstallW);
> UninstallProgram(root_key);
>
> Thanks for the help
>
> Tom
>
> On 4/19/07, James Hawkins  wrote:
> > On 4/19/07, Tom Spear  wrote:
> > > Try applying the patch before you comment on it.  See below..
> >
> > I read all your reply comments, and nothing you said leads me to
> > believe that I need to apply this patch to review it.
> > > On 4/19/07, James Hawkins  wrote:
> > > > On 4/19/07, Tom Spear  wrote:
> > > > > Apparently the last patch had multiple patches in the file because I
> > > > > didnt delete it before creating the new one..
> > > > >
> > > > > So here we go again.
> > > > >
> > > > > Check HKCU as well as HKLM for uninstall entries, using a for loop
> > > >
> > > > @@ -69,7 +69,7 @@
> > > >  /**
> > > > - Used to output program list when used with --list
> > > >
> > > > */
> > > > -static void ListUninstallPrograms(void)
> > > > +static void ListUninstallPrograms()
> > > >
> > > > The parameter list was correct as is.  If a function takes no
> > > > parameters, the correct list is 'void'.  Don't change parts of the
> > > > code that don't have to do with your patch, especially when you don't
> > > > know what you're changing.
> > >
> > > That one was an oops, I'll change it back...
> > > >  if (i < numentries)
> > > > -
> > > >    UninstallProgram();
> > > > -
> > > >    for (x=0; x<2; x++)
> > > > -
> > > >        UninstallProgram(rootkey);
> > > >
> > > > Why are you calling UninstallProgram twice with the same key?  Besides
> > > > that, using magic numbers (2) is bad coding.
> > >
> > > That is another oops.  I should have double checked this as well.  The
> > > use of the 'magic number' in this case is that there will never be
> > > more than 2 keys (EVER) to check.  However I will make a constant
> > > array instead and check x against the number of values in this array
> > > instead.
> >
> > Engineers at a certain software company decided that machines would
> > not have more than 640k of RAM anytime soon, leading to at least a
> > decade of headaches for developers.  Case in point, putting
> > self-imposed limits in your code is a bad design habit.
> > > > - HKEY keys[2];
> > > > - keys[0] = HKEY_CURRENT_USER;
> > > > - keys[1] = HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE;
> > > >
> > > > HKEY keys[] = { HKEY_CURRENT_USER, HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE };
> > > > -
> > > >   for (x=0; x<2; x++)
> > > >
> > > > You're hardcoding this value to 2, which is another bad magic number.
> > > > What if, hypothetically, more root keys are added to the list?
> > >
> > > see above
> > > > for (x = 0; x < sizeof(keys); x++)
> > > > - rootkey[0] = HKEY_CURRENT_USER;
> > > > - rootkey[1] = HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE;
> > > >
> > > > Same thing as above.
> > >
> > > see above
> > > > -
> > > >    sizeOfSubKeyName = 255;
> > > >
> > > > What is 255?
> > >
> > > I dont know, but if you look at the file (pre patch) that is already
> > > there, diff just deletes and readds it because it moved further down
> > > in the file.  However, to answer your question, I checked the MS
> > > website:
> >
> > The old code is clearly in the patch, and no one implied that you
> > wrote it.  The comment still stands though.  The 255 needs to be
> > replaced with a const or define that clarifies what the value
> > represents.
> > > http://support.microsoft.com/kb/256986
> > >
> > > <quote>
> > > The maximum size of a key name is 255 characters.
> > >
> > > The following table lists the data types that are currently defined
> > > and that are used by Windows. The maximum size of a value name is as
> > > follows:
> > > •       Windows Server 2003 and Windows XP: 16,383 characters
> > > •       Windows 2000: 260 ANSI characters or 16,383 Unicode characters
> > > •       Windows Millennium Edition/Windows 98/Windows 95: 255 characters
> > >
> > > </quote>
> > > > - HKEY rootkey[2];
> > > > - rootkey[0] = HKEY_CURRENT_USER;
> > > > - rootkey[1] = HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE;
> > > >
> > > > Same.
> > >
> > > same
> > > > -
> > > >                    /* FIXME: UninstallProgram should figure out
> > > >
> > > > which root key to uninstall
> > > > -
> > > >                     * from, as opposed to just going with the
> > > >
> > > > first value in rootkey.  The
> > > > -
> > > >                     * entry gets removed this way as well, but
> > > >
> > > > it is not apparent by this code.
> > > > -
> > > >                     */
> > > > -
> > > >                    UninstallProgram(*rootkey);
> > > >
> > > > What is the point of adding rootkey if you're not going to use it?
> > > > UninstallProgram(HKEY_X) is a lot shorter.  The point is, don't add
> > > > something until you're going to use it.  On top of that, this new code
> > > > is basically UninstallProgram(HKEY_CURRENT_USER) when the original
> > > > code was (parameter added for convenience)
> > > > UninstallProgram(HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE).  That's not right.
> > >
> > > Well, unfortunately there isnt a way to call UninstallProgram without
> > > a parameter if it is declared that way.
> >
> > Please reread my comment.  rootkey is superfluous, not the parameter
> > to UninstallProgram.
> > > So I could either hardcode it
> > > to HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE, since it requires a parameter now, or I could
> > > leave it as *rootkey to be fixed later.
> >
> > Since rootkey shouldn't be in the patch (should only be added when
> > it's used), the only option remaining is to call
> > UninstallProgram(HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE).
> > > I tried to find a way to for
> > > loop it, but because it is inside DlgProc, I get an error when
> > > compiling.  So I left it alone..  As the comment says, the code works
> > > as is, but it is not apparent by the code.  If someone has a
> > > suggestion on how to get that specific line of code to look proper (so
> > > you can tell if it is doing UninstallProgram on HKLM or HKCU, please
> > > feel free..
> > >
> > > The reason we need the parameter added to UninstallProgram is because of:
> > >
> > > /* delete the application's uninstall entry */
> > > RegOpenKeyExW(HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE, PathUninstallW, 0, KEY_READ, &hkeyUninst);
> > >
> > > being in the original file.  I think it's better to have whichever
> > > root key is being used passed to the RegOpenKeyExW.....
> >
> > I never had any objections with the new parameter to UninstallProgram.
> >
> > --
> > James Hawkins
>
> --
> Thanks
>
> Tom
>
> Check out this new 3D Instant Messenger called IMVU.  It's the best I
> have seen yet!
>
> http://imvu.com/catalog/web_invitation.php?userId=1547373&from=power-ema...