by Adam <no@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Jan 6, 2008 at 03:43 PM
On Sun, 6 Jan 2008 11:17:34 -0800 (PST), carlg@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>You only have to install it in a folder in root directory
Is a root directory of a mapped (or SUBSTed) drive okay, or must it be
the root of a physical drive?
I install programs in a separate folder (which has a SUBSTed drive
letter) because:
1. It is easier to access at a DOS prompt because there are no spaces
in the path name.
2. To segregate things that I install from the preinstalled junk (in
the "Program Files" folder) which I might remove someday. Over time,
Windows tends to ac***ulate a larger haystack around the needles which
I might want to find. Keeping the preinstalled junk in its own
haystack might make it easier to identify and deal with later.
> I know you take issue with this approach but I take issue with
>Microsoft's approach.
Ditto. Several of their approaches.
Good reading:
http://www.arachnoid.com/lutusp/dll_article.html
No application should assume that it can copy DLLs
into the system directory
Adam
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
