Sorry, small correction: > "0" is *not *GREATER_EQUAL to "3"
not the other way around ;-) On 24.10.2013 21:57, MuldeR wrote: > Thank you! > > I had a look on the proposed code and I think there is a major problem with > trying to increase only the *minor* version =-O > > > Let's assume we are on a future Windows 9 and that one has the actual version > number 7.0. > > GetVersionEx() would still report v6.2, so the first version we would try to > check via VerifyVersionInfo() /with the proposed/ code would be v6.3. > > But the check for v6.3 would fail! That's because the minor version "3" is > *not *GREATER_EQUAL to "0". > > So we would stop there and end up with v6.2. Bummer! > > > With the code that I proposed earlier (and when starting with v6.2), we would > /first/ check v7.0. If that worked, then we would check v8.0 next. > > And if that didn't work, we would go on to check v7.1. So with my code we > should end up with v7.0, as expected... > > See here: > http://pastie.org/private/prwfdmzmc6kullfrvvuq > > Regards, > MuldeR > > > On 24.10.2013 15:19, Friedemann Kleint wrote: >> Hi, >> >> for your information, we are working on a patch for this: >> https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,69129 . >> >> Regards, >> Friedemann >> >> -- >> Friedemann Kleint >> Digia, Qt >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Development mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development > > > -- > http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=Jay-fG9eaYk#! > > > _______________________________________________ > Development mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development -- http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=Jay-fG9eaYk#!
_______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
