Max, On Fri, Jan 24, 2003 at 10:07:43PM -0000, Max Bowsher wrote: > Jason Tishler wrote: > > 2. non-persistent: rebase DLLs ignoring setup.exe's rebase database > > (which is essentially today's, MS-like functionality) > > "non-persistent" seems to imply that the effects get cancelled out by > a reboot. Is this really the case?
No, once a DLL is rebased it stays that way until it is rebased again regardless of reboots. By "non-persistent," I mean that once a set of DLLs are rebased the knowledge (i.e., persistence) of their base addresses is lost. Hence, if you want to rebase a new DLLs, then one must rebase *all* DLLs again to guarantee that no DLL base address conflicts will occur. If setup.exe or rebase.exe persists this information in a convenient form, then the user can rebase incrementally without having to rebase all the DLLs over and over again. > If not, can we discuss a more self-explanatory name for this? Sure. Can you suggest a better name for this concept? I hope that using the term "non-persistent" does not delay the voting process... Thanks, Jason -- PGP/GPG Key: http://www.tishler.net/jason/pubkey.asc or key servers Fingerprint: 7A73 1405 7F2B E669 C19D 8784 1AFD E4CC ECF4 8EF6
