The dev-90 package depends on msvc*71.dll (Visual 2003) and does not depend on msvc*90.dll, so no problem here.
...but when I tested dev-90 without msvc*71.dll in PATH tiffinfo still works.
But the worst thing is that these msvc*dll are handled differently than the other dlls (they can be found in this winsxs folder while it is not in the PATH).
Oh. Does this mean there is no way at all to test "without X in path"? That does indeed suck.
...got me reading up what winsxs is, and oh my, is this ever a rabbit hole. Or a tarpit. Lots of conflicting information, in authoritative tones of course. The links /appear/ to have some of the best info. Though they're all focussed on the prolem of disk space consumption it does reveal some bits about how winsxs appears to work. This in particular catches my attention:
''' In practice, nearly every file in the WinSxS directory is a “hard link” to the physical files elsewhere on the system—meaning that the files are not actually in this directory. For instance in the WinSxS there might be a file called advapi32.dll that takes up >700K however what’s being reported is a hard link to the actual file that lives in the Windows\System32 '''
There's other information which indicates the hardlinks go the other way, the real file is in winsxs and the link in program files or wherever. In any case which in the context of our problem may actually mean winsxs is not always searched, rather that it's reached by way of the link in path. Perhaps. (?)
http://www.winvistaclub.com/f16.html http://serverfault.com/questions/79485/windows-2008-winsxs-directory-growing-uncontrollably-blocking-server http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/w7itproperf/thread/09578403-a363-49ac-beb1-33f0da8d0e25 http://superuser.com/questions/1/why-does-the-winsxs-folder-grow-so-large-and-can-it-be-made-smaller -matt _______________________________________________ osgeo4w-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/osgeo4w-dev
