Re: Static or Shared MFC DLLs?
- From: Scot T Brennecke <ScotB@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 06 Jun 2009 03:12:14 -0500
Paul wrote:
What I don't get is why does Windows OS even have these DLLs if every
app is including them in their exe? Isn't one purpose of DLLs to
share? So basically, apps should include in the exe every DLL that it
calls even though every XP or Vista OS comes with a satisfactory
mfc*.dll. I wonder if Mac OS is like that.
Regards,
Paul
That's the mistake. Windows DOESN'T have the DLLs. They are installed by application installers. If they're already on the machine, cool. your installer should be prepared to install them if necessary. If they are already there, no wasted space... the ones in place will be used.
.
- References:
- Static or Shared MFC DLLs?
- From: Paul
- Re: Static or Shared MFC DLLs?
- From: AliR [VC++ MVP]
- Re: Static or Shared MFC DLLs?
- From: Paul
- Re: Static or Shared MFC DLLs?
- From: Ajay
- Re: Static or Shared MFC DLLs?
- From: Paul
- Static or Shared MFC DLLs?
- Prev by Date: Re: Static or Shared MFC DLLs?
- Next by Date: Re: Static or Shared MFC DLLs?
- Previous by thread: Re: Static or Shared MFC DLLs?
- Next by thread: Re: Static or Shared MFC DLLs?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|