MFC, MFC42.dll and MFC42.dll

MFC42.dll and MFC42.dll

Author	Message
Vijay Ra #1 / 7	MFC42.dll and MFC42.dll i have developed a software (MFC) now while installation it needs to copy (MFC42.dll NEWER VERSION) but the older version is already in use by many application and services. how do i copy NEW MFC42.dll please suggest .... Gautam Jain http://www.--*.com/
Wed, 15 Aug 2001 03:00:00 GMT

Dirk Bohnemeye #2 / 7	MFC42.dll and MFC42.dll Any professional installation tool is able for doing this. If you don't want to use such a tool write a program using the Win32 API function MoveFileEx(). In NT you can use the MOVEFILE_DELAY_UNTIL_REBOOT flag, in 95/98 you have to do a little more work, but it is described in the function description of MoveFileEx(). -- Dirk Bohnemeyer p.s. For e-mail remove one of the 'o's from my address. ------------------------------------------------------- Vijay Ram schrieb in Nachricht ... Quote: >i have developed a software (MFC) >now while installation it needs to copy (MFC42.dll NEWER VERSION) >but the older version is already in use by many application >and services. >how do i copy NEW MFC42.dll >please suggest .... >Gautam Jain >http://www.stationeryworld.com/gautamjain
Wed, 15 Aug 2001 03:00:00 GMT

David Wilkinso #3 / 7	MFC42.dll and MFC42.dll Dirk: I think Gautam is concerned about backward compatibility, not how to do it. MFC42.dll is supposed to be backward compatible (better be!), but there have been some reports that in a few situations it is not. I just give thanks for the day that I decided to go with static linking ... David Wilkinson =================== Quote: > Any professional installation tool is able for doing this. > If you don't want to use such a tool write a program using the > Win32 API function MoveFileEx(). In NT you can use the > MOVEFILE_DELAY_UNTIL_REBOOT flag, in 95/98 you have to do a > little more work, but it is described in the function description > of MoveFileEx(). > -- > Dirk Bohnemeyer > p.s. For e-mail remove one of the 'o's from my address. > ------------------------------------------------------- > Vijay Ram schrieb in Nachricht ... > >i have developed a software (MFC) > >now while installation it needs to copy (MFC42.dll NEWER VERSION) > >but the older version is already in use by many application > >and services. > >how do i copy NEW MFC42.dll > >please suggest .... > >Gautam Jain > >http://www.stationeryworld.com/gautamjain
Wed, 15 Aug 2001 03:00:00 GMT

David McCab #4 / 7	MFC42.dll and MFC42.dll Quote: > I just give thanks for the day that I decided to go with static linking > ... What, you mean increase the memory footprint and load time of your application with no other benefit? When MFC42.DLL is dynamically linked, chances are it's already in memory so it can just be mapped to the address space. This is fast. Loading even small parts of it from disk is much slower. -- Dave http://mccabe.balliol.ox.ac.uk
Wed, 15 Aug 2001 03:00:00 GMT

David Wilkinso #5 / 7	MFC42.dll and MFC42.dll David: Whoa! Actually, my app is not very big, and with the static linking the installation program (InstallShield) will fit on a floppy. If I went with dynamic linking, the footprint of my app would be smaller, but my installation program would be much bigger because I would have to distribute the MFC and CRT dll's. For me, fitting on a floppy is important because my app is distributed to end users over the web, and this gives them the opportunity (which they are advised to act on in no uncertain terms) to back up the installation program. Also, for me, download time is more important than the time it takes for my application to load, which is pretty minimal anyway. In any event I think chances are that my particular users will NOT have the MFC dll's already in memory, so the load time would actually be longer with dynamic linking. If the time comes that my app will not fit on a floppy, I may switch to dynamic linking. Till then, no way! David ============= Quote: > > I just give thanks for the day that I decided to go with static linking > > ... > What, you mean increase the memory footprint and load time of your > application with no other benefit? > When MFC42.DLL is dynamically linked, chances are it's already in memory so > it can just be mapped to the address space. This is fast. Loading even small > parts of it from disk is much slower. > -- > Dave > http://mccabe.balliol.ox.ac.uk
Wed, 15 Aug 2001 03:00:00 GMT

Johan Rosengre #6 / 7	MFC42.dll and MFC42.dll Given the size & loading times of todays program, it hardly seems worth to bother if you can avoid the compatibility problems... Johan Rosengren Responsable Informatique PACTA S.A.
Wed, 15 Aug 2001 03:00:00 GMT

Dirk Bohnemeye #7 / 7	MFC42.dll and MFC42.dll David, his last question was 'how do i copy NEW MFC42.dll'... I only described how to copy. But you are right, sometimes it would be better to staticly link to MFC. -- Dirk Bohnemeyer p.s. For e-mail remove one of the 'o's from my address. ------------------------------------------------------- Quote: >Dirk: >I think Gautam is concerned about backward compatibility, not how to do >it. MFC42.dll is supposed to be backward compatible (better be!), but >there have been some reports that in a few situations it is not. >I just give thanks for the day that I decided to go with static linking >... >David Wilkinson >=================== >> Any professional installation tool is able for doing this. >> If you don't want to use such a tool write a program using the >> Win32 API function MoveFileEx(). In NT you can use the >> MOVEFILE_DELAY_UNTIL_REBOOT flag, in 95/98 you have to do a >> little more work, but it is described in the function description >> of MoveFileEx(). >> -- >> Dirk Bohnemeyer >> p.s. For e-mail remove one of the 'o's from my address. >> ------------------------------------------------------- >> Vijay Ram schrieb in Nachricht ... >> >i have developed a software (MFC) >> >now while installation it needs to copy (MFC42.dll NEWER VERSION) >> >but the older version is already in use by many application >> >and services. >> >how do i copy NEW MFC42.dll >> >please suggest .... >> >Gautam Jain >> >http://www.stationeryworld.com/gautamjain
Fri, 17 Aug 2001 03:00:00 GMT

Page 1 of 1

[ 7 post ]