I compiled on my XP 64-bit machine but still no difference. From what I can
tell the dll is not getting built correct as a shell extension and that is
causing the dll to not even be loaded. This seems to be validated since
listdlls.exe does not show pproctx.dll being loaded at all. On the 32-bit
system listdlls shows the dll as loaded under explorer.exe
I tried adding logging statements to functions in shellext.cpp but still did
not get any debug file created. I see that shexinit.cpp already has the line:
PProLog(TEXT(">>>Call initialize"), TEXT(""),0,0);
Assuming that the init should be first and write the file seems to indicate it
is not getting this far so it is not surprising that my log entries did not
show up either.
I'm out of ideas right now and probably won't have much time to work on it
until next week at this point. I can try a few things before then but have
little time to devote to debugging it.
--- In [email protected], "brucexs" <bswit...@...> wrote:
>
> >
> > As for the dll not looking to be built correct I was basing that on the
> > fact that all the other shell extension dll's from other products (that are
> > listed in the registry) have a file type of application extension but also
> > have a "version" tab but the 64-bit dll I built is missing the version tab.
> > Even the 32-bit one I built has it. Thus it makes me wonder if it is not
> > getting built correctly.
>
> Makes sense. I also have seen the "shell extension" on the tooltip in
> explorer.
>
> >
> > Using dumpbin/exports I can see the following. It is missing dllmain. To be
> > fair though the original dll does not show dllmain either.
>
> You are right. The output looks correct.
>
> >>
> > I am going to try to compile it on my 64-bit machine and see if that helps.
> > I had been cross-compiling on a 32-bit machine. If that does not help then
> > I will pursue adding the logging calls.
>
> Good idea. I have seen various stuff in forums on the web saying the
> cross-compiling may cause issues. I did not read in detail, though.
>
> Let's leave in the yahoo groups. Its actually more convenient for me plus
> possibly someone else may have some thoughts.
>
