Heh, good point about the static linking, dependency walker i don't think would expose that.
However, unless it was statically linked, there's no double checking needed ;) It shows you what anything is dependent on, and that's how I came to that conclusion, by following all the branches. ;) Ok, anyone else have a better way to tell? :P > Am Freitag, 8. M�rz 2002 10:38 schrieb Pat Magnan: > > Ok, how dumb of me earlier. I ran all the .exes through the dependency > > walker that comes with Visual Studio. > > > > A VB App (any that I've ever seen, are all dependent on: > > MSVBVM50.DLL > > which in turn depends on stuff like GDI, Kernell, etc type dlls > > > > An MFC App would have MFC42 dll in its dependency tree, then GDI and > > kernell etc. > > > > For Office (for example), I see neither of those. I see WWINTL32.DLL > > (don't know what this is) and MSO97.DLL (likely just a library of > > common code for office), but no VB runtime or MFC42 anywhere in there. > > You did double check that MSO97.DLL doesn't depend on MFC or VB? Well, they > may have just linked that in statically.. > > cu, > Prefect > _______________________________________________ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders > > --------------------------------------- Eighty percent of life is showing up. -- Woody Allen _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
