[Thomas Heller] > ... > The problem in this case was not the installer doing things wrong, the > fault was alone on my side: I did use the dlls from my WinXP system > directory, and the installer correctly used them to replace the > versions on the target computers. If this was a win2k system, the > file protection reverted this change, and the users were lucky again > (except they had an entry in the event log). Unfortunately win98 and > NT4 users were not so happy, for them it broke the system. For some of them, and probably a small minority (else we would have been deluged with bug reports about this, not just gotten a handful). For example, there were no problems after installing 2.3.2 on two different Win98SE boxes I use. I *did* note at the time I was surprised installation asked me to reboot (which is a sure sign that Wise detected it needed to replace an in-use DLL), but I forgot to panic about it. Under the theory that the boxes where this broke are the same ones contributing to worm spew exploiting MS bugs that were fixed a year ago, you were doing the world a favor by calling their owners' attention to how out of date they were <wink>.
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4