version<unspecified>

wino at piments.com wino at piments.com
Sun Oct 30 16:22:42 CST 2005


On Fri, 28 Oct 2005 20:15:06 +0200, Paul Vriens <Paul.Vriens at xs4all.nl>  
wrote:

> On Fri, 2005-10-28 at 19:53 +0200, wino at piments.com wrote:
>> I have an app that tests the version number of certain dlls it uses on
>> startup.
>>
>> The first seems to be riched20.dll
>>
>> If I run it on 20050524 it starts and works.
>>
>> If I run from the same installation after installing wine-0.9 (or just
>> about any winecfg based version) it starts throwing errors like:
>>
>> riched20.dll version<unspecified> was found, this program requires at
>> least.....
>>
>>
>> I then have to pull in a native dll and tell wine to go native when in
>> fact the buildin functions  work perfectly.
>>
>> bug or feature?
>>
>> I guess this was done intentionally or is a result of an intentional
>> change and seems related to winecfg becoming active.
>>
>> What is the best way to deal with this? It seems a shame to install  
>> native
>> dlls when the wine code does the job.
>>
>> TIA
>>
>>
>>
> Hi,
>
> don't have time (yet) to do stuff in Wine, but have a look at
> http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-patches/2005-September/020423.html
>
> this shows you how to add version stuff to a dll.
>
> cheers,
>
> Paul
>
>
Thanks for the info.

I was not really wanting to get into recoding the wine dlls, I'm not sure  
I'm upto it and I would not have the inside knowlege to know what version  
would best represent each dll.

I have an app. which is working pretty well under 20050524 but if I run  
one of the winecfg releases the app. throws this version <unspecified> bit.

I would like to know what change brought this about.

Is the text "unspecified" actually returned by wine now or is this the  
app's interpretation.

There seems to be a definate regression here.

Do you have any more detail on this?

TIA




More information about the wine-devel mailing list