L. Adrian Griffis wrote: > On Thu, 21 Aug 2003, jo - wrote: > >>Does Linux use DLL concept, that is only one copy, of the code is in memory, >>is shared by multiple program? > > Yes. They are called "Shared Libraries" or "Shared Objects". It's > amusing to think of them as "DLL like", since the Unix world has > had them for quite some time. The difference would be that when I install a program and it needs a newer or an older version of a library the program usually won't uninstall the version on your computer and replace it, therby f**king the whole system up. I have not had this happen even once on Linux, but have had it happen multiple times on Winders. Have you ever had to install multiple database clients on Winders? DB2, then Oracle 6, then Oracle 8, then fix what Oracle 8 jacked up, then Informix. I can't for the life of me figure out why they have to make this all so complicated. Put the stuff you need for Y program in c:program filesy companyY program ver. and stay the hell out of everyone elses directory. Put the dll files in c:windowslibrarieslib. name&ver. if you must and DON'T remove already installed libraries. When it is time to run an uninstall routine, remove what you brung w/ you and leave the data and the library if another program registered that they are using it too. That is what the bloody registry was supposed to be for. I don't want to get off on a rant here (he does his best Dennis Miller impression), but what the H E double hockey sticks is a program doing putting fifty keys in the registry for? How about you go to HKLMsoftwarecompanyprog&ver. and put everthing in there you need for saving the size of windows to draw and what have you and then ONE bloody key where you keep track of libraries to say I use this bloody library? I've seen programs write fifty keys spewed all over the place and when a program can't or won't uninstall itself you're in there wiping every key that refers to it out of the registry to get it gone so you can reinstall it. The worst are the spyware and viruses, but I understand why they do what they spew. So why does Microsoft allow a program by virtue of being allowed to write A SINGLE key to the registry they can write as many keys to it as they want. I would think you could program in a limit on the number of keys and that they can only be written to one subsection of the registry. But I guess in their 34 million lines of code they couldn't figure that one out. BAH. rant I'm going to install Red Hat again tonight just to cleanse myself. -- A Computer without Microsoft is like a chocolate cake without mustard. -as seen on IRC