Re: [PATCH 0/2] MR1166: ntdll: don't claim to have not found a library that is in place

[Konstantin Kharlamov (＠Hi-Angel)]

On Thu Oct 27 23:40:26 2022 +0000, Konstantin Kharlamov wrote:
> Alright, well, maybe: `Library lib2.dll (which is needed by
> L"Z:\tmp\foo\lib1.dll") or a library it depends upon not found`? Though
> a bit longer than a `…or has dependency missing`, but a "missing
> dependency" sounds a bit too abstract. I see no better wording.

Ping. Which way should I go with? I'd personally prefer to have more explicit message at the cost of excess argument, but if maintainers prefer a vague message instead but no additional parameter, I will implement that. Probably a text like in my prev. comment.